The Order of Business is No. 1, Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009 — Second Stage, to be taken on the conclusion of the Order of Business and to conclude not later than 2 p.m. if not previously concluded, with the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed 12 minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed eight minutes. Senators may share time.
Order of Business.
Fine Gael opposes the shortening of the Order of Business. There should be a full Order of Business in the House.
I ask the Leader to ask the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, to address the Seanad.
The Order of Business has not been shortened, it started earlier. That is the only change.
That is fair enough.
That is good news.
If the Minister for Health and Children is in a position to discuss with Fianna Fáil backbenchers the cuts of €1 billion proposed in the health services, surely she should address both Houses of the Oireachtas. In this way, we could all be aware of what is happening in services as sensitive as the health services. Cuts of €1 billion are significant in the health service. I seek an immediate debate on this issue and that the Minister for Health and Children address the debate.
I ask the Leader to examine the matter of legislation on IVF. We have discussed this many times, it has been raised at least every term for the past ten years. The discussion on Michael Jackson's children brought it to my mind. They say he might not be the biological father of his children, that the mother may not be the surrogate mother of the children and that a surrogate may have been involved in one or more of his children. Would any western country allow this to happen unregulated? There is no legislation governing this issue. If all these things about Michael Jackson's children were true and happened in Ireland, no regulation or rule would govern it. What about when the children grow up and read these reports? This country has no regulation governing IVF even though it has been raised consistently over the past decade. Something should be done about it.
I draw the attention of the House to the establishment of an important legal point, unusually, in the District Court. This is the ruling by Judge Harnett recently that a person cannot insult another person by communicating via an animal. It will be of interest to my Fine Gael colleagues to note that this arose in a dispute reported in The Irish Times between Councillor Bambrick of Bagenalstown Town Council and a fellow Fine Gael activist, Mr. Larry Byrne.
No names.
We do not know where this will finish and I do not want names mentioned.
I will mention no more names.
Senator Mullen can mention the animal. Perhaps it was an ass.
It is well suited if that is the case.
One man had instructed his dog not to approach the other when the two men crossed paths and to come away from the man or the dog would be contaminated. The judge says this comment could not be construed as an insult because he was talking to his dog.
Senator Mullen is barking up the wrong tree.
The moral of the story for our Fine Gael colleagues is that they should keep some of their activists on a lead.
We discussed defamation law briefly last week in the context of the important award made against Independent Newspapers. I draw the attention of the House to an excellent article written by my colleague in the Law Library, Mr. James McDermott, which echoed a feeling I have expressed. My concern about the relaxation of the defamation laws in the proposed allowing of a defence of a fair and reasonable publication, which I oppose, is balanced by the strong case to be made for requiring judges and not juries to make awards in libel cases. I said this during our discussion of the Defamation Bill on Second Stage and Committee Stage. Mr. McDermott quotes Lord Bingham in a case involving Elton John about the problem of trial judges leaving juries to their own devices to pick out of thin air the appropriate figure for damages. This leaves jurors in the position of "sheep loosed on an unfenced common with no shepherd". That illustrates the point very well. The Defamation Bill has not yet returned to the Seanad but I hope it is not too late for that point, that judges rather than juries make libel awards, to be considered.
According to a report in The Irish Times today the cost of running the Oireachtas is to be reduced by €40 million. This is welcome. It is clear it will be a leaner and meaner establishment, but could it also become greener?
Join the Green Party.
In my office we are swimming in paper. Is it necessary to use quite so much paper? Legislation is sent to every person when it could be made available on-line and people could download it as they see fit. I am sure this matter has been raised and discussed previously, but it needs to be discussed again.
I have a simple question regarding the business of the House as we approach the end of the session. It has been asked in the House previously but I have never heard a satisfactory answer.
The Senator should not hold his breath.
Why is it that for many weeks there is little or no legislation before the House but in the two or three weeks before the end of the session there is an extraordinary flurry of activity with measures being introduced and pushed through both Houses as is happening again now? Why is it that the Minister, the Department or those who manage the flow of business to the Houses cannot pace themselves a little better throughout the year? Why can legislation not be introduced in the House periodically in a manner that will allow it to breathe, as it were? The Leader often says he does not guillotine legislation and that is true, but that misses the point. It is not a question of saying we can have an hour or two to read the legislation but of allowing the public to consider important legislation over a period of weeks. I am not suggesting that the Government never makes an effort to do that. In fairness, it does. However, that should be the universal approach to legislation, unless it is genuinely emergency legislation which must be put through the Houses in a period of days.
I have in mind some of the criminal justice legislation we are dealing with this week. There are two Bills this week and I presume the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Bill will be introduced in the House next week. The latter includes proposals for the considerable curtailment of the liberty of the citizen. It may well be that this is justified and that Members of the House support it but it is one of the most serious actions a parliament can take. The guarantee of last September is probably the most serious action a parliament can take in that it mortgages the future and future generations. However, in terms of the liberty of the citizen the proposed legislation provides for the expansion of the use of the Special Criminal Court and removing the important protection that juries provide. I disagree with Senator Rónán Mullen regarding any further restriction on the use of juries. In the criminal context, in particular, it is a further restriction on the liberty of the individual, as is the introduction of secret hearings in the District Court regarding detentions and so forth. I appeal to the Leader to ensure, especially with legislation of this nature, that the public and the Houses be given an opportunity to consider such legislation over a longer time span. It should certainly be over a period of weeks and not days, as is now being proposed.
Will the Leader invite the Minister for Health and Children to the House to discuss the swine flu problem which is occurring in different locations throughout the country? The principal of Roxboro national school in Roscommon was contacted recently by the parent of a child who had the virus. He speedily contacted the HSE and the parents of the other children. There was a meeting and this allayed the fears of the parents and pupils of the national school, which is just a few miles outside Roscommon town. I pay tribute to the speedy action of the principal, his staff and the HSE. The fact that they met with the parents to discuss the issue allayed the parents' fears. It is a worrying issue. People have died from swine flu in other countries but the flu is manageable. Perhaps the Minister could come to the House and outline what action is being and will be taken to prevent the spread of swine flu. There are approximately 100,000 cases in the UK at present, which is unbelievable. There should be an opportunity to put on record the fact that action can be taken speedily. The HSE, which usually does not get much praise, can be given credit in this regard.
The Exchequer figures that were published yesterday will probably be debated in the Dáil today. Will the Leader ensure time is allocated next week to debate them in this House? There is a deficit of almost €15 billion halfway through the year. A total of €6 billion of that €15 billion was the cost of putting additional money into our banks. As a result of these figures one of the main rating agencies, Moody's, has again downgraded the rating of Irish Government debt. This has a crucial effect. It means the Government, on behalf of Irish taxpayers, will have to pay more to borrow money in international money markets. In all the debates that took place on the banking crisis and the solutions to it, the Government continually assured us that the taxpayer would not have to pay a single cent to save the banks. However, the figures released yesterday and the decision made by Moody's show that this is not the case. The taxpayer will pay. This shows that the Government is either not telling the truth about this or is looking to avoid the truth when it can. Will the Leader ensure time is allocated to discuss this next week and regularly in the new session?
Earlier this morning a press conference and briefing was held by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties on the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Bill. I was the only Member of the Oireachtas who attended, which is a pity. I hope Members will take the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the brief that has been made available to them on this important matter. What is happening is extremely dangerous. Senator Alex White is 100% right. It is proposed that people can be convicted on the word of a garda and that they can be detained and their detention continued as a result of an ex parte application. In other words, they are not necessarily informed and are not represented. The Bill proposes that applications for warrants must be heard in secret, regardless of whether the judge or the Garda want this. This type of legislation was thrown out by the House of Lords. One of the noble lords in Westminster said that the threat to democracy comes not from terrorism or gangsterism but from this type of law. Similar provisions were thrown out by a committee of the Houses after the Hederman report because they are a violation of democracy. It is very dangerous to rush such measures through, with a guillotine imposed in the other House and probably no proper discussion of them in this House. I hope the Leader will make provision to deal with this.
Could the Leader approach the appropriate Minister and ask that the voluntary standards industry is supposed to observe in manufacturing venetian blinds be made mandatory? There was a tragic case before the coroner's court recently regarding a young boy who was strangled. His family was very caring and obviously took good care of the child but it was a dreadful occurrence. There has been a number of these cases. This tragedy could have been avoided by a fairly simple modification but it was not made. We cannot leave it to the manufacturers to do this. The jury asked us to attend to these matters.
Judges frequently make recommendations or comment that it is a pity the Oireachtas has not taken a certain action, that it should have done something or that it was negligent in some regard. I believe it would be appropriate to establish a channel of information between the Judiciary and the Oireachtas so judges can send us such messages. The message recommending that we take certain action could be placed on the Order Paper under the heading, "Message from the Judiciary". I accept there is a separation of powers but this proposal would be important and healthy for democracy.
I join the call for a debate on the economy, focusing on the banks, the Government's commitment and the necessary bailout the Government undertook for the Irish banks. Notwithstanding the bailout, NAMA is being established. There have been very successful turn-arounds in other countries whose Governments took a practical application to the value of the assets. Some 30% of Irish assets are held abroad, primarily in the United States and the United Kingdom, in many cases in New York and London, and these will be the first out of the recession. Before we call the loss on the banks we must wait and see what happens. In many cases, a profit has accrued to the nation state that undertook to invest in its banks.
I support the calls for mandatory manufacturing laws regarding safety.
The Judiciary often makes very practical calls on the legislative arm of Government, including, in the past, calls for expenditure. How do the many members of the Judiciary imagine this expenditure might be funded, except through taxation? We are still waiting for many of them to make their voluntary contributions which would help towards the expenditure their many members call the Legislature to make.
Now that we know the NAMA legislation will not be with us until September, perhaps the Leader will give the House an indication of the relevant dates, if they are known. This delay is creating further uncertainty, leaving too many, perhaps an increasing number, of serious questions unanswered. Undoubtedly, this legislation, once passed, will be referred immediately to the Supreme Court for a test to try to preclude people from attempting to delay it further in other respects. It is important we know this. It would have been preferable for the legislation to have been dealt with and passed this month, but perhaps the Leader will inform Members as to its drafting. I understood it had been completed.
On another matter — I shall try to avoid walking my dog——
Questions to the Leader now.
This question is for the Leader and it relates to the horse dung issue in Killarney National Park. I appreciate that during the tourist season the national parks and wildlife service is anxious to avoid confrontation, but if the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, did not have the power in law to do so, why did he make an order effective from 8 June when there was not a hope in blazes of it being put into effect?
When will the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, referred to by Senators Alex White and David Norris, be introduced in the House? I have a real fear that any rushed legislation is bad legislation and I fear this legislation is likely to be rushed. I take a different view from those who spoke about it because I believe in jury trials and in ensuring that juries operate successfully. There was a very interesting article in The Irish Times during the week in which a person who had served on a jury referred to the behaviour of some of the jurors, casting doubt as to the methodology practised by juries being accurate and worthy of consideration. Let us have that discussion but let us make sure the legislation is not rushed.
I hope the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, will come to the House, initially to discuss swine flu but also the pharmacy situation. The figures she sent the House during the week are startling. She stated she would take action to attempt to reduce the cost of pharmacies for which the figures she provided were enormous, namely, €1.68 billion in 2008 compared to €1 billion before that. That is a very substantial increase. Her point was that it costs €600 million to deliver and transport €1 billion worth of drugs. In other words, the drugs cost €1 billion from the factory but it costs in the region of €600 million to deliver them to the patient. That does not seem sensible.
The Senator is right.
The Minister made the case in favour of pharmacies, as have others in this House, including Senator Ross. Let us ensure we have an open debate on the matter.
Like Senator Quinn, I reiterate my remarks of yesterday and ask the Leader to facilitate a debate with the Minister for Health and Children regarding the pharmacies issue. There is genuine fear among people who need pharmacies, particularly among smallholders. I speak for them, not for the big conglomerates.
I ask the Leader to facilitate a debate on public transport. In our metropolitan areas and, according to Senator O'Donovan today, in rural areas, there has been a cut in the provision of services. I would like to hear the views of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, the Green Party and the Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, on how they intend to create a more mobile community by means of public transport. Given that Bus Éireann is now slashing and cutting services in all parts of Ireland, it is important that we have a discussion on the country's mobility plans.
Is the House to have a debate on the report by the IMF, as Senator O'Donovan requested? It is an extraordinary legacy of Government that we have gone from a surplus of €3 billion or €4 billion to a deficit of approximately €14.7 billion. That is some way to manage the country. That is one of the Government's enduring legacies to the people. We must have a debate on the IMF report and on the Exchequer returns released yesterday. As Senator O'Donovan rightly pointed out, it costs us now more to borrow to pay for and service the debt and there has been no action plan from the Government despite the protestations of Members on the opposite side.
I support the observations on rushed legislation which apply in particular to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Last year there was the case of the Intoxicating Liquor Bill——
Hear, hear.
——which was rushed through during the last few days of the session. The Seanad debated that Bill in the full knowledge that none of its amendments would be accepted because the Bill would have had to be returned to the Dáil for final approval, and as the Dáil was in recess that was not possible. We face the same situation this year. At first the Minister denied that legislation was necessary in particular areas. Subsequently there was an atrocity, with a subsequent rush to legislate, and we have ended up in this position. Although we have supported the Minister in all his efforts to deal with the problems of organised and gangland crime, this form of legislating brings the entire Oireachtas into dispute.
I refer to the Lisbon treaty. Presumably, the House will debate the referendum Bill next week but there will not be a debate on the actual treaty, which means we will not have a full debate on it until after the summer recess. This is most unfortunate. However, a decision came from Europe this week regarding a particular issue, which was discussed briefly in the House and which is of fundamental importance. We can discuss the constitutional implications of the Lisbon treaty, all the related issues and the meaning of the treaty, but one practical, tangible and substantial benefit which came from Europe this week was the decision to put a cap on mobile telephone roaming charges, in respect of both receiving and making calls. We have all been shocked by the bills we receive after the holidays when we see the astronomical costs involved. We were ripped off by the mobile telephone operators, including those in Ireland, namely, Meteor, Vodafone and O2, which have been making profits on telephone mobile charges that are 20% higher than elsewhere. This decision is the type of distinct benefit that Europe brings to consumers in this country and it should be acknowledged. The mobile operators refused to agree to take this action voluntarily although they agreed to do something else, namely, to standardise the chargers for mobile telephones. We face many charges every time we change our mobile telephones. There is now a commitment to standardise one aspect but I suspect that once again the European Commission will have to impose a directive to ensure that it happens. I ask the House to acknowledge that distinct benefit.
At least one financial institution, namely, the Bank of Ireland, operates a minimum property value of €175,000 in the greater Dublin area in respect of approving owner-occupier mortgages. It has turned away applicants for mortgages below that threshold. At present, brand new two-bedroom apartments and houses are available in north County Dublin for approximately €150,000. Young people who have a capacity to service those mortgages are being turned away. It is a scandal. At a time when the Government is encouraging first-time buyers and low-income earners to avail of affordable housing schemes, it is scandalous that the Bank of Ireland will not lend on these properties. It is unacceptable that our financial institutions, which have received vast sums of taxpayers' money, operate such a restrictive policy with regard to young people when there is clearly a number of properties available below that amount.
Hear, hear.
The policy's effect will be that prices will adjust to the higher level, resulting in a distortion of the property market. We cannot have upward price pressure on house prices due to arbitrary lending policies by State-supported banks. The Bank of Ireland has confirmed to me that the €175,000 threshold is one of its criteria in respect of mortgage applicants in the Dublin area. The other criteria are the applicants' capacity for repayment, the availability of a deposit and reasonable value. I pointed out to the bank's spokesperson that all of these criteria would be more easily met at the lower house price. I call on the Leader to bring the matter to the attention of the Minister for Finance and to have him investigate the matter and put pressure on the bank to change its policy.
Senators
Hear, hear.
I support my colleagues who called for the maximum possible time to be made available next week and, if necessary, the week after to give due consideration to the criminal justice legislation that will be before the House. I noted with interest Senator White's comments and the phrase used by Senator Norris, in which he indicated his concern that people may be convicted on the word of a garda. This matter must be debated fully. However, we should not ignore the fact that, while people could be convicted on the word of a garda, people have been murdered on the word of criminal gang lords and gangsters in recent years.
Hear, hear.
Week after week and month after month, Senators have demanded a political and legislative response to gangland crime. I hope that, as a result of serious and due consideration of next week's legislation, we will ensure people will not be murdered on the word of gangsters.
I support Senator Bradford's comments. During the week, judges stated that they had no problem in getting convictions or people to testify in the courts and that they could not see a necessity for the Bill. However, these cases must appear in the courts in the first place and the Garda finds getting people to testify difficult. Convictions are possible when people testify, but the Garda cannot get them into the courts. As is evident from cases in Limerick, families have been murdered as a result of helping the State get convictions.
An emergency press conference was called today by the civil liberties organisations. I did not see them having any emergency press conferences when there were murders in Limerick on the word of criminals. Last Monday, the headline in the Irish Independent told of how eight year olds were being used by criminals to fire-bomb and threaten people in Limerick. When the Government took action on Wednesday, it was castigated. How does one tackle the problem of eight year olds? We are trying to tackle the instructions and those who are getting those eight year olds to do their bidding. On the word of a garda, such people can be convicted. There will be no convictions without this provision and those people will be unaffected.
I commend the Government and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, on the proposed planning and development Bill, a new section in which addresses the issue of people who are in financial difficulties and have received planning permission, which can be a difficult process lasting two or three years. Where, for example, they cannot get mortgages or loans from banks or one of the spouses involved might have lost his or her job, a provision in the Bill will allow them to apply to their local authorities to get their time periods extended by up to five years without needing to go through the planning process again. It is a great sign of common sense in the Government that, in these difficult times, it will not force people to undertake the entire planning process or incur costs or hardships. I look forward to the Bill appearing before the House and I commend the Minister on his efforts. By the way, the Valentia cumann came up with the idea. Just to let the House know, the boys in Valentia are coming up with great ideas all the time.
Yesterday, the Joint Committee on Education and Science learned of a clear link between homophobic bullying and self-harm and suicide. Up to now, we may have had a hunch about a link, but we now have evidence. This is serious information. In the United States of America, 30% of suicides are linked with bullying, including homophobic bullying. In light of this information, the Minister for Education and Science must act carefully and sensibly. It is not good enough to circulate documents. Teachers, schools and youth clubs need appropriate training on how to create a climate of respect for sexual diversity. Will the Leader ask the Minister for a response in this regard?
Will the Minister for Health and Children and the pharmaceutical unions come together to solve the current impasse? Last year's mess went on for a long time. Pharmacies came up with solutions that the Minister ignored, so they took her to court and she needed to repay all the money. The last thing I want is another protracted situation. Allow the pharmacies to devise cuts — they know how to do it — and listen to them. The Minister should not impose her unworkable solutions. Will the Leader ask the Minister to address this issue? Given the inadvisable amount of legislation being rushed through, there are no signs that it will be debated before the summer recess, but I would appreciate it if the Leader brought my suggestion to her.
Yesterday, we read about the poor Malley family's terrible loss of Arran, their two year old son, who was strangled by the cord of a window blind. While there will not be time before the recess, will the Leader arrange for legislation to be put in place so that this child will not have died in vain, which would safeguard and protect children and to prevent other families from needing to live with such a tragedy. Yesterday, the Malley family asked that there be no further——
Mobile telephones off, please.
It was not me, actually. The Malleys asked that there be no further deaths.
(Interruptions).
Senators Twomey, Mullen, Alex White, Quinn, Buttimer and Healy Eames called for a debate on pharmacies. I have given the House an undertaking that the Minister will attend the House before the summer recess to provide an update on the serious challenge facing pharmacists, the Department and consumers. I hope to inform the House on Tuesday about when the debate will occur.
Senator Twomey referred to IVF and used the example of the late Michael Jackson's family. He had great friends in County Westmeath, especially Paddy Dunning, his family and everyone in the Rosemount-Mullingar area where he carried out——
And Athlone.
It was actually the Kilbeggan area.
It was the country and western part of the world.
Michael Jackson made some terrific recordings there, which the world will have the benefit of hearing in the coming years. I accept Senator Twomey's point on there being no safeguards or regulation. We must consider the issue as a matter of urgency.
Senator Mullen referred to the defamation laws. When the Bill returns to the House, his concerns can be addressed.
Senators Alex White, Norris, Quinn, Regan, Bradford and Daly discussed the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which the House will debate next week. The longest time will be afforded it — most of the day and the night.
There are two Bills in the House next week concerning the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. On Wednesday we will deal with Committee and Remaining Stages of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009 and on Thursday we will consider the Criminal Justice (Amendment) Bill 2009 for most of the day and evening. No section or line of the latter Bill will go undebated. There are some very eminent colleagues from the legal profession in the House who will afford the House the benefit of their experience and expertise. We genuinely and sincerely look forward to their contributions. The Bill is extremely necessary, as Senator Bradford stated. Senator Daly has stated the challenges must be met such that the law will be feared. We are legislators on behalf of the people and next Thursday is the day on which we must respond to the challenges facing the Government and the Garda Síochána, including the Garda Commissioner.
Senator Leyden has asked for the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, to come to the House to update us on the swine flu epidemic. Thousands, if not tens of thousands, have contracted the disease in the United Kingdom. We might be able to couple the debate with that on pharmacies.
Senators Donohoe, Hanafin, Buttimer and Ryan referred to the published Exchequer figures and called for a debate on the IMF report. I have left aside all day and evening next Friday to discuss the report, on which all Senators want to make their views known. At the meeting with leaders of the groups on Tuesday we will determine what time will be allowed to each Senator in which to make a contribution. I want all Senators to think about the matter over the weekend and decide on the timeframe they wish to request. I will not be found wanting in this regard. Regardless of whether the debate must last for seven, ten or 12 hours, I will allow all 59 Senators to make a contribution on the report next Friday. Colleagues have been preparing their submissions for the past few days.
Senators Norris, Hanafin and McFadden asked that the law be amended on foot on the awful tragedy in which a young boy lost his life when asphyxiated by the cord of Venetian blinds. When he became entangled, his feet were only two inches off the ground. I agree with the Senators' request and will pass on their strong views to the Minister.
Senator Coghlan referred to the NAMA legislation which I understand will be available in September — I would guess early September. The Senator knows as much about it as I do, but if it is published at the end of July, every Senator can tease out his or her views during August. I hope we will be back early in September to pass it in both Houses. The legislation is very sensitive and difficult. I know the Opposition has very close contacts at a very high level within the legal profession. The legislation is ground breaking and other member states in the European Union are watching what we will do. Representatives of one of our nearest neighbours were here during the week to learn what we were doing, as the measures in their country are not working. I hope the legislation will assist in freeing credit as quickly as possible because, unless this is achieved, we will all be in difficulty.
Senator Buttimer called for a debate on public transport. I can accede to this request, but it will be after the summer recess, as the Senator will appreciate.
Senator Regan asked about the Lisbon treaty legislation which we will consider next Thursday. On Second Stage, I invite Senators to make their views known on the forthcoming referendum. The debate will be open ended. I am considering a period of four hours, but if this timeframe is insufficient, I will extend it, with the agreement of the House. It is necessary that colleagues express their views in this regard when the Minister is present next Thursday.
Order of Business agreed to.