Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 1 Dec 2011

Vol. 211 No. 16

Order of Business

The Order of Business is No. 1, National Tourism Development Authority (Amendment) Bill 2011 — Committee and Remaining Stages, to be taken at the conclusion of the Order of Business and conclude not later than 2 p.m., with a sos between 2 p.m. and 3 p.m.; No. 2, motion to approve the terms of the draft scheme entitled Credit Institutions (Eligible Liabilities Guarantee) (Amendment) Scheme 2011, to be taken at 3 p.m. and conclude not later than 4 p.m., with the Minister to be called on to speak first, the contributions of spokespersons not to exceed five minutes and one Sinn Féin Senator not to exceed two minutes, and the Minister to be called on to reply not later than 3.50 p.m.; and No. 3, Irish Film Board (Amendment) Bill 2011 — all Stages, to be taken at 4 p.m., with the contributions of group spokespersons on Second Stage not to exceed ten minutes and those of all other Senators not to exceed eight minutes and the Minister to be called on to reply not later than 5.20 p.m.; Committee and Remaining Stages to be taken immediately at the conclusion of the debate on Second Stage and conclude not later than 6.30 p.m.

We did not get an opportunity to have a proper debate prior to the budget. There are further reports today of a 10% increase in premiums for private health insurance policyholders. This increase will be brought about because the Minister for Health is going to impose a 31% increase on private health insurers for the use of public beds. Is the Leader aware that since 2009, more than 110,000 people have had to give up their private health insurance because of the economic situation, with 43,000 giving up private health insurance in the first half of the year? How does it make it even remotely attractive for people to have private health insurance with a further increase of at least 10% on private health insurance premiums? It will push tens of thousands out of the net and increase the pressure on the public health system. This is a serious departure that we heard about yet again by way of a leak. It is said that it will be announced in the budget next week. As every day passes, I am wondering how many things will be shoved in under the radar. I am calling for a specific debate on this issue.

During Private Members' business last night, we had an interesting debate on the Fianna Fáil motion on public nursing home beds and community hospitals. I raised the point that the Minister for Health should not preside over Government policy on public and private nursing homes because of his conflict of interest. It is a serious issue and I would like the Government to address it. We cannot have a situation where a Minister closes public nursing home beds to fill private nursing home beds when he is linked to that system. It is outrageous this individual is overseeing Government policy in this area.

AIB acceded to the Government request on the recent ECB interest rate reduction but Bank of Ireland and the ICS Building Society did not. The Leader and Senator Bacik told me that if the banks did not pass on the rate decreases, the Government would introduce legislation. We have prepared legislation on this and will introduce it but where is the Government's legislation? What about the mortgage holders in Bank of Ireland and ICS Building Society? There will be at least two more rate decreases. What is the Government doing? I am going to give up even asking about this.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

Yes, where is the legislation the Government promised to ensure the covered institutions would pass on the rate decreases? Where is the mortgage arrears implementation strategy that was promised would be published before the budget? It has not been published. The Minister for Finance said it might be published by Christmas but I doubt that. The Government has gone through a full year without doing anything for distressed mortgage holders.

Senator Darragh O'Brien has once again reverted to the year zero policy so common in Fianna Fáil, where history started with the general election in February, which is now a year ago, according to him.

Fine Gael and the Labour Party are in government.

The Government has been in power for nine months after 14 years of Fianna Fáil-led Government which led us to the economic crisis we are in today.

What did the Government promise? It said it would have a mortgage arrears implementation strategy.

I am getting weary of reminding Senator Darragh O'Brien of the fact that history did not begin in February this year.

Senator Bacik does not have to respond to me. The Leader of the House is due to respond. The Senator does not have to say anything.

I am not responding to the Senator.

Do not respond then.

In fact, I am not responding to the Senator.

Senator Bacik is responding.

When acting as Deputy Leader last Thursday I gave a full response to the Senator's query about homelessness and the Government's mortgage arrears policy.

Thousands of mortgages in arrears and the Senator brings out a 500 household pilot scheme.

I gave a full response when acting as Deputy Leader last week and I certainly do not intend to give a response today because that has been done.

I am calling for a debate in the new year on the reports that have been published by the Catholic Church's own internal body, the National Board for Safeguarding Children, on a number of dioceses and child protection policies in those dioceses. Some of the findings are encouraging and demonstrate great improvement in practice but equally there are some that are very worrying about the dreadful and appalling recent failure by the church and its authorities in particular dioceses to protect children in those areas. We must debate that in light of the reports from within the church but also in light of the other reports that have been published over time about different failures in the church.

We also need to look at failures by the State in terms of inadequacies in State protections. Important steps were taken by the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality which looked at the new legislation on withholding information to create a regime of mandatory reporting of child abuse. That was very welcome and we heard from a number of organisations, as we heard from organisations on the vetting Bill. It would be useful for this House to debate this in the new year to look at the panoply of legislative measures promised or in train by then. Not only have the heads of the vetting bureau Bill been published and comments made by the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, we have made useful recommendations on foot of submissions made, will now do the same about withholding information and then see the Children First guidelines put on a statutory footing. All of this is in train and it is welcome the Departments of Justice and Equality and Children and Youth Affairs have moved so swiftly on this. It would be useful in this House to review what has been done in light of the reports.

I also call for a debate on community policing. We had the Garda Commissioner before the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality this morning to speak about community policing. Some of what he said was extremely informative, particularly on the closure of Garda stations in rural areas and other matters. He gave an interesting response to a question I asked about February 2012 and the retirements at senior level and their effect on front-line policing services. It would be a useful debate for us to have in the House.

For the information of the House, I was talking about two minute contributions. Leaders have three minutes.

I have just come from a meeting of the group of Independent Senators who are Taoiseach's nominees during which we discussed how we could publicly thank the Leader for his responses when we ask for debates. I would particularly like to thank him for his response to the domestic violence issue I raised this week.

I have a question on the motion on prostitution and trafficking that took place 12 October. Today is 1 December. For that debate, the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, came into the Chamber and said she had spoken to the Minister for Justice and Equality about the issue, that he wanted to begin a public consultation process and that all public submissions would be considered by the Government having been presented to the Attorney General. The Minister wanted to do that within six months and we would then move the issue on. He also promised at that stage to publish a report on a visit to Sweden by the Government with members of the Dignity project. He has since done that, reviewed the report and the Attorney General's report on it, of which I express our appreciation.

The Minister did say, however, that he was concerned to ensure a public debate on the issue was open to the widest possible audience and that it would happen within a six month period. He said that in mid-October, and that he would put out a paper shortly on the public consultation process. I checked with his office yesterday and the document outlining the public consultation process is still not complete. Will the Leader ask the Minister if he will be able to publish that document for public consultation prior to Christmas in order that we can get on with consultation and have it complete within six months?

Could the Leader give us an update on the implementation of the European regulation concerning agency workers? I am concerned about this. I believe in fair treatment for all workers but this seems to be a bizarre situation where agency workers immediately get the same treatment as those who have been working for a considerable time. At a time of economic stringency, this is a rather dangerous thing to do. It will have a major impact on, for example, the HSE — requiring an extra €35 million I believe. It could impact further down the scale on small businesses, leading to diminishing employment. The neighbouring island, Britain, managed to get a derogation from this for a period, but we do not appear to have done so, which shows laxity on the part of this and the previous Governments, and a lack of flexibility on the part of the social partners. If we are interested in the well-being of society, we should take a flexible attitude in this in the interest of the entire community and not just one section. I realise this was apparently used as a bargaining tool by some of the unions.

I referred to looking for an examination of the ethical standards in the Irish media. I continue to urge that this take place in light of the continuing revelations of the Leveson inquiry in Britain which appear to direct attention to the probability that exactly the same practices that were followed by British newspapers were followed by their counterparts here. I am just as concerned about electronic media. I have had a communication from a person who is not a constituent of mine. Comments have been put on a website about her profession — solicitors — which may not be the most popular profession. This kind of thing should not be tolerated and some method of control should be found for it. These comments include:

"In India throwing Acid in someone's face is a perfectly acceptable means of fighting crime. Ireland needs a similar method.

. . . the best way to get my point across is to kidnap and torture crooked Solicitors. I find that to be the best method to deal with these Rats.

In America if a Solicitor/Lawyer stole from a client he or she would be hunted down and killed and then the client would then commit suicide."

I find it astonishing that this kind of stuff appears on the Internet. I wonder if there is some way to control it. While I realise that it would be extremely difficult to do so, this is incitement to commit crimes and it is very dangerous. It is the pursuit of a personal grudge because of a legal dispute upon which I am not in a position to adjudicate. Regardless of the rights and wrongs of it, I do not believe throwing of acid, kidnapping, torture or murder of citizens of Ireland should be advocated by other citizens of Ireland.

The climate change conference is taking place this week in Durban. While considerable attention is being paid to the economic situation in Europe, which is very important, in light of Dr. Mary Robinson's comments last week about the need to address climate change in a global forum, it would be useful for us to focus on the issue in the new year. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, will travel to Durban this week. These talks are in preparation for the ending of the Kyoto Protocol which will expire at the end of 2012. Although the EU only accounts for 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it is important for us to play a strong role in these talks. Last week Dr. Robinson told us that by 2050 Africa will have doubled its population. It behoves all of us to prepare for our children's and grandchildren's future and the type of world in which they will live. It is a very important forum for us and this House should focus on it in the new year.

The report the Central Bank issued yesterday will make chilling reading for those in the retail sector, particularly in the run-up to Christmas. As Senator O'Sullivan has indicated, more than 30% of all sales take place in December. We are in the run-up to 8 December and the period beyond when there is increased consumer spending. However, the Central Bank report indicates that people are continuing to save and not spend. I ask the Leader to encourage those consumers, who will be able to afford to spend this Christmas, to focus on Irish-made goods to protect jobs in the retail sector. The Government cannot do so because of EU competition law, but there is nothing to prevent this House and the Oireachtas in general from promoting Irish-made goods because every time a consumer purchases an Irish-made good it saves a job. With the multiplicity of retail outlets and the multiplicity of well made Irish products the consumer can now make the choice in favour of Irish goods.

Under the public petitions initiative, I ask the Leader to consider inviting representatives of the retail sector to come to the House next year. We are embarking on this initiative to highlight areas of society which are not normally highlighted. If the Government is, as we all are, promoting job creation, it is important for this House to play its part. In that context if representatives were to come to the House in January, they could give us an update and perhaps propose some initiatives that would help to not only protect jobs in the retail sector but would create new ones.

Senator Norris referred to the temporary agency worker directive. It is not true that there was no attempt to seek a derogation — there was an attempt but it failed. We are now left with confusion on the part of workers and employers. This is an unusual situation in that it is often one side or the other, but not both. I ask the Leader to invite the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, to come to the House on this urgent matter. The directive is due to come into place by Monday, but we have not yet had legislation to have it transposed. There seems to be confusion on the enactment of legislation side and on the practicality side.

I acknowledge a letter I received from the Leader of the House on changes being made to speaking time for Sinn Féin Members. I thank the Leader and those in the other groupings and parties who supported us on the issue.

I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on child poverty in the new year. It is an indictment of the State and previous Governments that every measure of poverty an inequality in the State is increasing, especially when it comes to children. Between 2001 and 2010 the number of people experiencing enforced inequality doubled from 11% to 22%. This includes people who are going without two basic essentials each day, including a hot meal. The number of children deprived of very basic essentials has risen very substantially from 23.5% in 2009 to 30.2% in 2010. The number of people out of work has risen and now stands at 448,600. Many families can no longer pay their mortgages and cannot pay bills.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

I am asking for a proper debate in this House on child poverty. Yesterday, Government Members of the Dáil had the opportunity to vote in favour of a motion to protect the rates of child benefit being paid to families, yet it was voted down. It is very important in these difficult times to protect struggling families and children.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader? He is out of time.

We need to deal with the very real child poverty issues here and should have a debate on the matter.

A most significant event took place yesterday, which I am sure we all greatly welcome, namely the ECB co-ordinated campaign with the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and other leading countries' central banks. It is a programme to make available cheap-dollar money to last into 2013. We have already seen the boost it has given to markets and I hope it will instil confidence. Although obviously more needs to be done, when the European leaders meet on 9 December, I hope they will be forceful in achieving further stabilisation of the euro. They need to ensure that the stability fund, the EFSF, is further strengthened because without that we will not have the consistency and continuity that is so necessary.

What happened yesterday is a huge first step and has already boosted confidence. It is hoped this can be built upon without treaty change. As stated by the Taoiseach, EU budget rules can be enforced without treaty change. If treaty change is necessary, let us consider it. I accept going that route will take a lot longer. I wish the Taoiseach and Minister for Finance well. I ask that the Leader provide time for a debate on the euro and the future of the eurozone.

I support Senator Bacik's remarks in terms of the debates for which she called in the new year. It is important we are provided with an opportunity to scrutinise legislation to the maximum extent possible and that we have an opportunity to discuss issues before legislation comes before us.

Like Senator Bacik, I found yesterday's engagement with the various bodies that appeared before the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality very interesting. Many issues which we should be discussing in this Chamber were highlighted during that meeting. I would also like time to be provided for a debate on the findings of the church audits. Most Members would agree when I say that Mr. Ian Elliott deserves particular credit for the manner in which he carried out his work. I find the tone of this audit truthful and satisfactory, as compared with previous reports. While I do not wish to be critical of those reports, the language used in the audit shows the wrongs of the past in terms of the manner in which cases were handled, for which there must be consequences, while at the same time recognising good practice.

The difference this time is perhaps media reception of the issue thus far, which has been positive. While everything has been ventilated, the approach has been measured and considered. It is hoped that will continue because it will be to the good of best practice in the area of child protection. There is bad and good news in the audit but I look forward to the church helping to provide a model of best practice which can be picked up on by other groups in our society. Despite the progress made, the bad and sad news is that this problem is not going to go away. We need to step up our engagement on this issue across all levels of society. This House should play a particular role in that examination.

I agree with Senators Mullen and Bacik that it would be desirable and helpful to have a substantive debate on the broader issue of the child sex abuse scandal and the introduction of appropriate Government legislation. I, too, attended yesterday's meeting of the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality at which the question of mandatory reporting and the withholding Bill were discussed with various interest groups.

For me, what stood out once again, notwithstanding that arising from the meeting more questions than answers remained, is the need for us to reflect on the stark figures which clearly show that the vast majority of children are not sexually abused behind the altar in the church, by coaches in a GAA club or in swimming clubs but by family members in the family home. This silent and secret abuse requires a strong and coherent response from Government. This issue must be an integral part of our debate in the new year. It is not alone appropriate but essential that we discuss and make recommendations on issues arising from the various sex abuse scandals in the church. We must remember that in broader society — the facts speak for themselves and cannot be ignored — the majority of child sex abuse occurs in the family home. This must be ventilated and responded to. This issue was referred to yesterday as the silent and secret side of the scandal. This is not going to go away and needs to be at the very core of our debate.

I urge the Leader to provide time for a debate on insurance, which impacts on every aspect of life. There are people who have no moral constraints when it comes to making claims, their perception being that there is a bottomless purse and that this money comes from an anonymous source. Companies have had to put out advertisements reminding people that at the end of the day that money comes from the pocket of every individual paying for insurance. The reverse of this is the service providers. Reference was made today to a possible increase in health insurance premiums. There have been many such increases over several years.

We must remind those providers that there is not a bottomless purse and that premiums do not come from an anonymous source. It would be worthwhile for those providing a service in the health area to examine their charges. They must realise that the people who will eventually be paying for that service through insurance are ordinary people on whom there are already exceptional pressures. These increases of 10%, 15% or 20% are not met out of the air.

We must examine extravagant charges. I am not taking from the service provider. There is no question that the service provided is excellent. Those of us who have had to avail of it were delighted to have insurance cover. However, many people can no longer afford it. These people are to be denied the basic service and attention which every citizen should have. We should not automatically agree to further increases in premiums. We must at this stage take a step back and look at how we can justify the type of charges currently in place.

I call on the Leader to provide time for a debate on the euro. I spent the past two days in Europe, where people are worried. Ireland is worried and the world is worried. Fierce decisions face our leaders. They need incredible courage. We have been stumbling since 2008. The European Central Bank's commitment to a co-ordinated approach with other central banks is welcome. However, more certainty is needed. Without that certainty, the markets will go crazy. There is too much instability around.

At a local level, questions such as what are our options if the euro collapses and will people's savings be worthless are being asked. I wish the Taoiseach and Minister for Finance well next week. It would be great if we had a debate which adopted a responsible approach in terms of the situation we are in. I do not know if we have any other option. We need to face up to where we are at and to have that debate.

As we face into next week's budget, I was touched by calls from Irish people wanting to play their part, including volunteers and old age pensioners willing to take a €5 per week cut in their pensions and others offering to give up their child benefit. Perhaps the Minister for Finance should consider an element of voluntarism in the budget which would allow people to volunteer cuts which they can afford. There is such goodwill in Irish people. An addendum to that would be that if people's situations worsened, it would be possible to reverse such cuts. It is worth looking at this proposal in light of the tough decisions which the Government must make in finding €3.8 billion in cuts next week.

The human brain varies enormously. Some brains work extremely quickly, others a little less so and some can process huge amounts of information in short periods. I often have the privilege of rubbing shoulders with some of the international greats of science and stand in awe of what they are capable of achieving. Members may ask what is the relevance of this to the Seanad, all Members of which think quickly. I was distressed to hear there had been a change to procedures in the Seanad, whereby Members could no longer discuss three items per contribution on the Order of Business as the permissible number had been reduced to one. Perhaps if Members were a little more slow-witted, they might only process one item within two or three minutes, but they are smarter than this and can do so. Moreover, the reason this is happening is regrettable.

Were the Senator to become leader of his group, he would be able to speak on two or three issues.

Reducing from three items to one——

As we are very democratic, there is definitely that possibility.

Reducing the number of items it is permissible to raise from three to one has prevented me from raising two other issues I would have raised today but which I cannot do so now. I refer to the VHI increase and the use of agency staff at a higher rate of pay within the HSE in jobs that should be done by full-time staff. The other effect of this announcement will be an increase in the number of words per concept advanced and an increase in the hot air expended per concept, with a consequential increase in the carbon footprint of every Member of the Seanad. I wish to ask——

While the Senator is highly resourceful, I find it hard to ascertain what his item on the agenda today is.

I ask the Leader to consider, through the appropriate committees, readdressing the issue of the orders in this regard. This has limited the role of the Seanad as a forum for advocacy and means that fewer critical issues can be raised. I receive requests every day to raise issues in the Seanad. The reason this has happened is that there is inter-party procedural wrangling and a tit-for-tat food fight. I ask all Members of the major parties to remember the Civil War is long over and that the Seanad has important business to do.

Some parties were never involved in it.

I have spoken previously about multiple intelligence. As everyone is capable of having multiple thoughts, I understand Senator John Crown's comments in that regard.

The Leader should ask the Minister for Justice and Equality to consider the issue of the non-payment of fines. While the Minister stated previously that he was working on it, I do not know its status. Therefore, the Minister should make a statement on the issue. This morning I listened to a highly intelligent girl being interviewed on radio. She had been fined €500 but asked what was the point of paying the fine when she could go to prison instead. She actually went to the prison, signed her name and address and was out within four to five hours. As it was exactly the same with her second fine, she asked why should one bother to pay. There was no reason to so do in the knowledge that one would not be kept in prison but would be let out. The Minister should ascertain whether there is any way to put in place a system of deductions at source for persons who have been fined but decide not to pay for whatever reason. In the first instance, I refer to people who have jobs but also to those in receipt of social welfare benefits. There must be some penalty associated with this. Many individuals who go to court receive free legal aid. They take up the time of the Judiciary and the Garda. However, as someone stated on the insurance issue, this is not free, as someone is paying for it. We are fooling ourselves if we think this is the way to deal with the system.

I have listened to many intelligent people who have been fined and could engage in community service. However, the provision is not being implemented in the manner intended. There are many jobs available and many capable people with outstanding fines who choose not to pay them who could be used in this manner. However, the deduction of the fine at source would put a little pinch on everyone's pocket and people would then think twice about it rather than deciding not to pay the fine. Why should one bother to do so, if all one must do is stay in prison for five hours before one is back out on the street? The Leader should ask the Minister for Justice and Equality to come to the House to make a statement on the matter.

The report by the Catholic Church's child protection watchdog has revealed a shocking number of child abuse allegations in six dioceses, as well as a complete failure by the church to deal adequately with several of the allegations made. There were 164 allegations of abuse made against 85 priests over a period of 35 years. The reviews of the six dioceses of Raphoe, Tuam, Kilmore, Derry, Dromore and Ardagh and Clonmacnoise are the result of an internal church audit and do not examine the role of the State authorities in handling allegations of abuse. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, must establish a full independent commission of investigation with a remit to assess the handling of child abuse allegations in all dioceses by both the church and the State. The victims of child abuse have not had their voices heard and it is clear, given the upsetting and disturbing revelations, that further investigations are needed. These reviews have again brought home to Members that protection of the reputation of the Catholic Church was what the church was about, not the protection of children in its care.

I refer to a report in today's edition of The Irish Times on the involvement of University College Cork in a €9 million project on wave energy. A centre in the university has been appointed to co-ordinate the programme in 28 research centres in 12 member states of the European Union. This emphasises a point I made yesterday about the importance of research and development. It would be useful to have a debate in the Seanad to highlight the importance of sourcing funding and encouraging people to get involved in this area.

I revert to a point made by my colleague, Senator Labhras Ó Murchú, regarding VHI and the added costs being asked of people when paying health insurance, as well as the need for a co-ordinated long-term plan on this issue. While the concept of universal health care is under discussion, consideration also must be given to the refusal by VHI to give cover to a brand new facility in Cork which has now offered to quote at 6% below the current cost of medical care in one of the other hospitals in Cork. However, VHI is refusing to give cover to the new hospital, even though it is prepared to provide care at a cost that is 6% lower. This pertains to a reduction in costs, which is what competition does. This is the reason it is important to have a debate in the House on the issue of health care. It would be useful to have it at an early date to ensure that where there is an opportunity to reduce health care costs, it is taken and grasped at the earliest possible opportunity. The Leader should arrange a debate in the House on the issue.

Ba mhaith liom iarraidh ar an gCeannaire go mbreathnódh an Teach ar an gceist maidir le forbairt réigiúnach, agus go ndéanfaí é sin i bhfoirm sraith díospóireachtaí. I call for a series of debates, possibly in the new year. It will be important to consider the concept of regional development as, apparently, there does not appear to be a specific Minister entrusted with responsibility for regional development. My experience in the west and the north west suggests these regions have different needs and wants from some of the others. However, I will not be parochial in this regard as it is important to consider equally all regions on the island in detail. Consideration should be given to different issues regarding infrastructure, job creation, economic and education issues specific to these regions. A one-cap-fits-all approach should be avoided. The Seanad could play an important role in such a debate in teasing out some of the issues involved. The previous Government had a decentralisation policy, but it has been turned on its head. As I cannot discern a coherent policy on regional development, such a debate would be important and as part of it, I suggest Members could consider the relationship between the Twenty-six Counties and the Six Counties. The latter could be considered as a region and Members could examine ways to ensure better co-operation for the benefit of communities on both sides of the Border.

I join other speakers who called on the Leader to arrange for the appearance in the House of the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, to discuss the temporary agency workers directive. In so doing, I call on the Minister and the social partners to return to the table over the weekend as a matter of urgency to try to agree on some level of flexibility in respect of the directive. Members will recall that a number of weeks ago their colleague, Senator Mary Ann O'Brien, who is an employer made an impassioned plea to the Government and the social partners to ensure a degree of flexibility in respect of the directive. Small businesses will come under pressure and it is unrealistic to expect someone brought in temporarily to cover absences arising from sick leave or maternity leave to have the same entitlements immediately as those in long-term employment. Implementation of the directive will result in jobs being put at risk and will deter employers from taking on workers during busy periods or to provide cover during short-term absences. At a time when we are discussing the level of poverty, to which the only solution is the creation of employment, some flexibility is required. The British model of a 12 week qualifying period is realistic. I ask the social partners and the Minister to make a special effort in the next few days to address this issue as the directive is due to come into force from 5 December. This is a national emergency in that up to 7,000 jobs could be at risk. Therefore, the issue requires urgent attention.

I agree with Senator Feargal Quinn that there should have been a more thorough approach adopted to the discussions on the budget. However, I accept the Leader's statement that this will happen next year. Some €12 billion in tax forgone, as estimated by Dr. Michael Collins of TCD, is taken out of the Exchequer each year, but these items have not been discussed. While other target items such as child benefit have been discussed, these tax measures lack transparency in regard to the costs involved. We do not know what their benefits to society as a whole are. However, they distort the economy. A range of tax lawyers and accountants are advertising in today's print media on how to beat the budget measures. These tax lawyers and accountants produce nothing; they only move money away from the Exchequer into the hands of their clients. This is a massive source of income inequality because only the very rich can afford their services. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, was keen to address these points before she became Minister. I ask the Leader to stress to members of the Government that the standard rate of tax should be just that. At a time when we are so short of money, this €12 billion in tax forgone should come under scrutiny, with all the other items that have been the subject of pre-budget speculation.

Like other speakers, I am ashamed of what is emerging through the reports on abuse within the Catholic Church. As a practising Catholic, I find it distressful and difficult to come to terms with it. Something positive needs to be done by the Catholic Church. In my humble opinion, I suggest there be a day of penance or reflection when practising Catholics who do the right thing, live by the gospel and have no issues about their integrity could attend church and pray for the many victims whose lives have been destroyed as a result of child sexual abuse. I would like it very much if the archbishops and various other leaders in the Catholic Church picked a day on which they would open churches to people who wanted to go and express their disgust and abhorrence at what has taken place. Something like this would be appropriate for ordinary, decent, genuine Catholics to express how they feel about what has happened.

We debated legislation dealing with organ donation this time two years ago, but the debate was adjourned and the legislation has not been implemented. Something should happen in this area. I would like to read a few paragraphs from an article in today's edition of The Times about a couple who lost their five year old child. It reads:

When the medics were trying to save Luca's life, I asked a doctor what his chances were of surviving, and he said we were looking at the worst-case scenario.

It's a scenario which no parent wants to be faced with, but it was at that stage that we discussed organ donation.

We mentioned it to the ward matron that we would like him considered for donation because we wanted something positive to come out of this.

We send Luca's organs with love to all these people, especially to the little girl who they told us was just days away from dying.

She is now expected to leave hospital on Friday and be home in time for Christmas.

Luca did a lot of things in his short life whereas these two children have never been out of hospital and now hopefully they will get the chance to live similar lives.

He was such a lively lad who never sat still and he had such a sunny disposition and was a very happy little boy.

He was a five year old, alive and well and healthy when suddenly he developed a disease and died.

I mention the case of that boy because if the Seanad is not to survive, let us make sure we get something done and can look back and say we achieved this much. We need to make sure there will be more organ donations. The proposal put to the House was that there be an opt-out of organ donation. In addressing the issue we have to find a way to save lives. This is something we could do. Our record on organ donation is very poor and the number of organs donated is only half that in Spain where a different system is in place. There are co-ordinators in hospitals to encourage organ donation. When the parents in the case cited received the news that their child was going to die, they said they would love to think something positive could happen. Four children's lives have been changed: one child has been saved, another has probably been saved, while the other two can now leave hospital.

This is an issue on which we can act in this House. I, therefore, urge the Leader to knock on the door of the Minister to say we should not leave matters as they are, that we must do something in this area. The introduction of legislation providing for an opt-out clause or presumed consent is the correct way to go, but I am not saying it is only way. Such a measure, combined with the provision of co-ordinators in hospitals, is one way to save lives.

Senator Darragh O'Brien, among others, raised the matter of the proposed 10% increase in insurance premiums. I am not privy to budgetary decisions. We will have to wait and see what happens in that regard.

On the allegations made in regard to the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, he surrendered all his interests in business affairs following his appointment. In regard to nursing homes, the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, has full responsibility for them, not the Minister.

Why is the Minister, as opposed to the Minister of State, going to Abbeyleix?

That is why the Minster of State was here for the debate last night.

That is not right.

Senators Ivana Bacik, Rónán Mullen, Paul Bradford, Mary White and Martin Conway raised the matter of the reports on the six dioceses. My office contacted the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, who has agreed to come to the House early in the new year for a debate on child protection and what legislation is required.

Senator Katherine Zappone raised a matter to do with the Minister for Justice and Equality and a document dealing with prostitution. I will raise the matter with the Minister with a view to having the document published in early course.

Senators David Norris, Susan O'Keeffe and Michael Mullins, among others, raised the matter of agency workers and the possibility of seeking a derogation from the directive for Ireland similar to the one obtained by the United Kingdom. There is certainly a need for greater clarity on the issue which I will raise with the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton.

Senator David Norris also raised the question of ethical standards in the Irish media and the control of the electronic media. It is a difficult sector to control but, as the Senator mentioned, such incitement is totally unacceptable. I am sure there is a way of finding out what the sources were to dealing with the people involved.

Senator Deirdre Clune called for a debate on climate change. I will arrange a debate on the issue in the new year.

Senatord Paschal Mooney referred to the difficulties in the retail sector, a matter also raised earlier in the week. I agree with the Senator that we need to get the message out that it is important to buy Irish and to buy local. He asked whether the issue could be dealt by the Seanad Public Consultation Committee in the new year. I have received many telephone calls about the deliberations of the committee which were broadcast and viewed by many. They are all very favourable to the Seanad Public Consultation Committee and the groups and experts that have come before it. Quite a number of other people are offering to come before the committee to discuss various aspects of life in the country. It is a matter the committee will discuss and decide upon for the next term.

Senator David Cullinane raised the issue of child poverty which we can address as a single item, if necessary. I am sure it can also be debated in the context of the social welfare Bill.

Sinn Féin Senators have stated that they are willing to forfeit their right to ask questions when we have statements, questions and answers and instead make a three minute statement. I have agreed with them on this. In doing so it does not in any way recognise them as a group under Standing Orders or set a precedent for the future in this regard. The matter will be reviewed on a regular basis.

Very good. Well done.

I hope this breaks any impasse and helps the future workings of the House.

Senators Paul Coghlan, Fidelma Healy Eames and others called for statements on the euro. This is something on which we should have a debate early in the new year. A stable eurozone is vital to our national interests and for our future. I can arrange such a debate.

Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú and others called for a debate on the cost of health insurance. The issue was also raised by Senator Colm Burke when he spoke about a new hospital in Cork which has not opened. It seems ludicrous that VHI is not prepared to take on a hospital which offers a 6% reduction in costs. It would create new employment in the area. I agree that the cost of health insurance should be discussed in the House and it will be in the new year.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh called for a number of debates on regional development and other issues. I will certainly take them into consideration.

Senator Sean Barrett spoke about the budget. I am sure the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, will try to tackle and close the many tax loopholes.

Senator Feargal Quinn spoke about organ donation. I have requested an updated position from the Minister for Health and I am awaiting a response. The message should be put across to everybody that we can save lives through greater organ donation. I will contact the Senator as soon as the Minister responds.

Order of Business agreed to.
Barr
Roinn