The Order of Business is No. 1, statements on the operation of the Teaching Council of Ireland, to be taken at 11.45 a.m. and to conclude not later than 1.30 p.m., with the contributions of group spokespersons not to exceed eight minutes, those of all other Senators not to exceed five minutes and the Minister to be called on to reply to the debate not later than 1.20 p.m.; No. 46, motion 7, to add the name of His Holiness Pope Francis the First to be included among the most prominent visitors to be invited to address Seanad Éireann, to be taken at 1.30 p.m. and to conclude not later than 2.30 p.m., with contributions of all Senators not to exceed five minutes; No. 2, statements on the greyhound racing industry, to be taken at 3 p.m. and to conclude not later than 4 p.m., with the contributions of all Senators not to exceed five minutes and the Minister to be called on to reply to the debate not later than 3.55 p.m; and No. 46, motion 8, which is Private Members' business, to be taken at 4 p.m. and to conclude not later than 6 p.m.
Order of Business
The Fianna Fáil group welcomes the decision by the Minister for Justice and Equality to set up an independent review. The Fianna Fáil Party called for this at the very outset of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission bugging controversy. I believe it is only right and proper that the matter should be taken out of the political arena and the truth be verified.
Yesterday I raised the future viability of the post office network. The Irish Postmasters Union has invited Deputies and Senators to a briefing later today. More questions have arisen since yesterday and all these questions raise serious concerns about the future viability of the post office network. The Government, through the Department of Social Protection and An Post, issued press statements in the past five to six week welcoming the signing of a new contract, which had gone out to tender. Both An Post and the Department of Social Protection said this would ensure the continuing viability of the post office network. However, while An Post has highlighted that the new contract will generate business worth billions for the post office network, the Department of Social Protection has made it clear it is moving toward e-commerce and electronic transfers of money. Some 83% of the client base of the Department of Social Protection have bank accounts. It costs little or nothing to transfer moneys to a bank account but I understand An Post charges the Department in excess of €300,000 in administrative charges to cash social welfare cheques through the post office network. Somebody is not telling the truth. The Department of Social Protection has made it clear that the costs being imposed by An Post are prohibitive and expensive. If that is the case, it means that 83% of the Department of Social Protection client base will in future receive their money through the banking sector and not the post office. They will then cash their money through the banks and not the post office. At present one is more likely to meet a machine than a cashier in banks.
Hear, hear.
Can one image the chaos that will arise from this increased footfall? The most vulnerable in society, the infirm, the disabled and the elderly will join the already lengthening queues. This is an outrage. I request the Minister for Social Protection to come to this House today to clarify the relationship of her Department with An Post. This is about the future of thousands of jobs throughout the country. Questions need to be asked and it is vital we have clarity on whether the Department is anxious to enter into any form of negotiation with An Post on what is perceived as excessive charges by An Post. I propose an amendment to the Order of Business.
Will Senator Mooney clarify the amendment?
I propose the following amendment: that the Minister for Social Protection comes before the House today to clarify the relationship between her Department and An Post on the cashing of social welfare cheques and on the future viability of the post office network.
I join Senator Mooney in welcoming the Government decision to review the alleged bugging and matters relating to GSOC and An Garda Síochána. The matter should be taken out of the political arena which would mean we would not have to refer to it in this House.
With the permission of the Cathaoirleach, I wish to comment on IBRC and NAMA, a matter on referred to yesterday by Senator O'Brien.
We are not discussing yesterday's business today.
I am not discussing yesterday's business. I will raise it separately. I am very concerned that IBRC has two liquidators who were formerly KPMG staff. KPMG was the auditor to the Irish Nationwide Building Society, and two of its former staff are the liquidators of IBRC. I am concerned there is an apparent blatant conflict of interest. I read yesterday evening that Mr. Justice Peter Kelly is equally concerned and he has joined them as a notice party in an action before the courts. In regard to the question of residential mortgages, which my good friends opposite are concerned about and about which I am equally concerned, I do not think that is the business of IBRC. There is some suggestion that €200 million of loans will be floated and will be let go to NAMA. I do not believe that is the business of NAMA. I think the loans should be given to AIB or Bank of Ireland and the banks should work them out because they have the people to deal with it. Of course, nobody should be dispossessed. Anybody who is making an effort should be left in their homes, as to do otherwise would be disastrous for society. I hope the loans in respect of Irish Nationwide will go to the banks and not NAMA or IBRC.
I would like to ask the Deputy Leader if she would agree with me on how lucky we are to live in this wonderful country, particularly on a beautiful day like this. We are always being told laughter is the best medicine and this place is a laugh a minute. We are definitely not a banana republic; we are a Java republic and this appears to have given the Minister for Justice and Equality insomnia. Apparently, the police are bugging each other and are listening in all over the place. If one wants to find out what is going on or is any kind of a hacker one can go to the coffee shop located underneath their headquarters and plug into their Wi-Fi - whatever that is - and all the rest of it. I hope that they are using the equipment to listen to the crooks as well.
I had my telephone bugged in the 1970s and it was impossible to get a straight answer out of the then Government. I found it most irritating in the beginning but then I found it very useful because I had a direct line to government which I used. Apparently, the Army is now getting ready to bomb each other in Donegal which is a new revelation and is something to watch out for.
Perhaps to cure his insomnia-----
Does the Senator have a question for the Deputy Leader?
Yes. I am asking her if she agrees with me. The Minister has set up a review which is wonderful. Nobody knows what a review is and it will not do anything. Some judge will get paid some money for it but it is a complete waste of time because the Minister announced the result last night in the Dáil. This is a wonderful country to live in.
We had a splendid debate here yesterday on homophobia. I am very glad that Senator Mullen is here because he did not take part in the debate but wrote a big article, full of the most extraordinary intellectual gymnastics, in the-----
Does the Senator have a question for the Deputy Leader?
Yes. I am asking her if she agrees with me.
The Senator has asked her that question already.
The article was full of intellectual gymnastics and turned the victim into the perpetrator. It contained all of the usual kind of rubbish that comes out of people who have any connection at all with or are contaminated, should I say, by the Iona Institute.
I must say the following with seriousness. Despite all of this bland blather about respectful debate, some of the most hurtful and insensitive remarks - both inside and outside of the House and the amendments tabled by Senator Mullen and some of his colleagues - have wounded, upset and hurt me more than I can say. I do not accept this vicious attempt to restrict debate.
I welcome the Cathaoirleach back from Japan and hope that he had a wonderful time. I wish the same to all of the other Members of this House who travelled. Can the Deputy Leader find out how the trip was composed? I know something about the Japanese. I was invited once, as a Member of the Seanad, and then they found out that it was the Lower House in Japan that had issued the invitation and they would not touch a Senator with a barge pole because it had to be absolutely formal. I said to the ambassador that it was just as well it went that way because if we had snubbed the Japanese politicians they would probably all have had to commit hara-kiri. We are much more relaxed about this sort of thing. I understand that despite the invitation being issued directly to the House, a Member of the Lower House was foisted on the group by the Labour Party. How did that happen? Did the Japanese know about that? It must have been a considerable source of embarrassment.
That is not relevant to the Order of Business today.
It is very relevant because I am asking a direct question. It is very relevant because it was a delegation from this House. The Japanese would have gone mad if they had known. This man must have gone around posing as a Senator.
Shame.
I do not think that Members of the Lower House should be allowed to pose as Senators.
The Senator does.
We certainly never would demean ourselves by posing as Deputies.
This is not relevant to the Order of Business. I call Senator Hayden.
I welcome the Chathaoirleach back from his trip. I echo some of the concerns related to the trip and not because he was on it because we all know that he is an eminent representative of the House.
Hear, hear.
I am concerned that there was not one single woman in the delegation.
There were no fairies on it either but I would have gone.
I do not think a single gender delegation is the right message to send any nation. I do not think that we should ever send a delegation anywhere in the world without including a female Senator.
Hear, hear.
Why was Senator Hayden not included? She would have been great. She should call the Labour leader.
Has Senator Hayden a question for the Deputy Leader?
On foot of some of the comments that have been made here today, I reiterate my request to the Deputy Leader to arrange a debate with the Minister for Finance on the banking sector because a number of issues have been raised in the House. There have also been a lot of transactions in the public domain. For example, Hibernia REIT has announced that it will buy part of the Ulster Bank's portfolio, at a very significant discount, that includes a large body of residential property. We all know that there is a residential shortage in this country. Therefore, I would like to see a lot more transparency on what is happening to the loan books of financial institutions, particularly the ones that the people of Ireland have bailed out in one way or another.
I wish to raise an issue related to mortgage arrears directly with the Minister for Finance. I refer to the fact that there has been an increase in the number of repossessions. The increase is particularly happening in urban Ireland, and in the Dublin region in particular. There is a real issue for people who are in a marital breakdown situation. I refer to people who are in the process of a marital breakdown or have experienced marital breakdown. The bank will not deal with them as individuals but insists on dealing with them as a couple. That effectively means that the mortgage arrears resolution process cannot and does not work. I do not believe that we can ever more forward to resolve the mortgage arrears situation unless we deal with the reality of family breakdown. I would like to raise the matter directly with the Minister for Finance.
I suppose we had all better make declarations. I was not on the trip to the Japan either in case any questions arise and I would not have had the time to participate. I hope that the Cathaoirleach got on very well on his trip and represented the country well, as I am sure that he did.
I wish to raise the issue of the so-called review of what happened at Capel Street last week. Is the Labour Party not mortified about these shenanigans? It was in the newspapers today claiming credit for helping to draft the speech read by the Minister for Justice and Equality in the Dáil last night. It was a speech in which he prejudged the outcome of the so-called review that will take place into the documentation. It is a review that any of us could carry out if we simply conducted an Internet search or gathered the documents together. It is completely worthless.
I want to ask the Deputy Leader the following question. Why has a commission of investigation not been appointed regarding the matter? Why has the Government not proposed that the Oireachtas would appoint one? As the Taoiseach has said, no witnesses will be called, nothing is going to happen, there will be no powers of compellability. Therefore, if someone does not tell the truth there will be no consequences and if the documentation is flawed or incomplete there will be no consequences. The only way to get to the bottom of the issue is through a commission of investigation. I am certain that if the Labour Party Members were on this side of the House they would be the main people pushing for an investigation. This matter must be very embarrassing for them. It was outrageous last night that the Minister prejudged the outcome. It was more outrageous on Monday when the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice and Equality demanded that the GSOC, a statutory and independent body, be dragged into the Oireachtas and be dragged into the Minister's office.
The committee hearings that are taking place with the GSOC - I will participate in one today - should not have happened. The GSOC should not have had to explain the matter to the Oireachtas. It is not required to do so under statute but is required to report on certain things such as financial and administrative matters. The GSOC must be independent. Its independence has been badly damaged in the past week and will be further damaged by the proposed review which is so incomplete, wrong and out of tune with the Labour Party's history on all of these issues.
I want to put on record the following fact. This year the German taxpayer will subsidise the wind energy industry in Germany to the tune of €23 billion. That is not small change by any standards, even for the Germans. So much for cheap energy or for what we are being told is free energy. Yesterday, as part of an ongoing propaganda process, Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland published a report that is ráiméis masquerading as a report that is really propaganda driven by wind energy developers. The policy devised by SEAI is totally contaminated and undermined by vested interests. It is entirely unacceptable that this country is being sleep-walked into an energy policy that is being driven by developers in cahoots with policymakers. We know what happened the last time that happened in this country. I thought that we had left that kind of politics, policy making and strategy behind us. Have we replaced the Fianna Fáil Galway tent with a new teepee of cosy cronies? I do not say this lightly this morning, a Chathaoirligh. The chairman of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, Mr. Brendan Halligan, is a consultant for the wind industry. He works for the biggest wind farm developer in the country, Mainstream energy and is on the board of Mainstream energy.
It is not fair to Mr. Halligan to name him in the House and put him on the record when he is not here to defend himself.
Mr. who? I could not hear his name.
I look forward to him being able to defend himself at any juncture outside the House because I will repeat this position as soon as we finish here. This is on the public record. Mr. Halligan's position is untenable. He should resign because the fact of the matter is one cannot serve the public interest, devise the policy-----
The Senator is completely out of order.
This is a matter of serious public concern. SEAI has a plan to develop 28,000 MW of energy from wind turbines.
The Senator cannot impugn a person's reputation.
It will destroy the country, the landscape and people's homes.
Has the Senator a question for the Deputy Leader?
Can we have the debate on energy policy that Senator Kelly and I have been requesting for months?
The Senator should resign from the Labour Party.
We need to step back from walking this country into another NAMA for wind farm developers. The policy, as currently devised, is unsustainable economically and it will destroy the country environmentally for generations. This is a serious matter, which we will raise repeatedly.
Hear, hear.
The Senator does not have privilege at Labour Party Parliamentary Party meetings and, therefore, he is right to use it here.
I echo Senator Whelan's comments about the need for a debate on energy policy. The success of fracking, whether we like it or not, has changed energy prices and we need to review the policy.
Will the Deputy Leader comment on the remarks of Mr. Barroso last weekend that an independent Scotland might not be a suitable member of the EU? It is entirely inappropriate that he should have intervened in the Scottish referendum. Boundaries in Europe change. The Germany that is now the core member of the Union is quite different in area from the one that joined it. Slovakia and the Czech Republic separated from one another and both are members while the countries that were formerly part of Yugoslavia are either EU member states or on the route to accession. The decision in Scotland is best left to the people of Scotland. However, this is not the first time Mr. Barroso has made strange remarks about this part of the world, not least his comment at the turn of the year that Ireland has caused the banking crisis in Europe. Apparently, he was not invited to celebrations at Trinity College Dublin when Ireland was exiting the bailout. I was not invited either and, therefore, he should not have taken it too personally. I am not even sure if the event took place but he is prone to making such remarks and it is unsuitable for a person in his position to do so. The Deputy Leader is a distinguished lawyer and I am sure she will put him right on this issue.
I support Senator Whelan's comments on wind energy and his call for the resignation of Mr. Brendan Halligan. The wind energy project is an almighty mess, which could have been resolved in 2012 by the adoption of my wind turbines Bill. People were prepared to accept wind turbines if the set back distances were fair to them. My Bill is in line with the Cloghan judgment of An Bord Pleanála. As a result of my legislation not being adopted, there will be a mass protest on the streets of Dublin on 5 March and people will have their say then.
The pylons issue is similar. It was not dealt with and now we have an almighty mess. In the Cathaoirleach's own county, people will not accept undergrounding. There are various reports questioning the feasibility of the pylon project. The most recent, conducted by BW Energy Consultants and commissioned by Rethink Pylons, warned: "The case for exporting wind power to Britain is non-existent. Grid extension will not work in Ireland because prices will be too expensive..."-----
Is the Senator seeking a debate on this issue?
I am getting to it. The report further states: "The doubling of Ireland's wind energy output which EirGrid says is needed could destabilise the entire network and even result in power blackouts." There is evidence of various conflicts of interest. The former chairman of An Bord Pleanála is the chairman of EirGrid, the former chairman of EirGrid is a director of Element Power-----
The Senator is over time. Has he a question for the Deputy Leader?
-----while many others reports have been commissioned by Siemens to enhance these wind energy projects even though it manufactures the wind turbines. It is widely believed that SEAI is driving the wind element of green energy and not enough energy has gone into all other forms of green energy because of the conflicts of interest.
The Senator is over time.
Like Senator Whelan, I believe Mr. Halligan's position is untenable. He should resign and go now.
Has the Senator a question for the Deputy Leader? He is way over time.
Will somebody define "conflict of interest" and explain it to us?
Tá mé ag seasamh inniu le haird a tharraingt ar cheist atá i mbéal an phobail le fada an lá, ach nach bhfuil aon rud déanta ag an Rialtas faoi go dtí seo.
Today is the first anniversary of the Taoiseach's address to the women who survived the Magdalen laundries. In his speech, he said: "The Government and the citizens of Ireland deeply regret and apologise unreservedly to all those women for the hurt that was done to them." However, one year on, the Government is yet to introduce legislation relating to the apology. Earlier this month, Justice for Magdalenes Research called on the State to immediately begin work on the Magdalen laundries restorative justice scheme. It said that survivors have still not obtained the redress called for by the UN committee against torture and it is gravely concerned by unacceptable additional delays. The Minister for Justice and Equality confirmed that "less than half the women have got their money and none has got their pension or health benefits".
Surely these women have suffered enough. Most are in the later stages of life and many are in declining health. According to the Government, the legislation is pending but this is of no use unless it is immediately enacted. These women have waited long enough for justice and the State owes them reparation. It is even more alarming that the nuns and religious orders that ran these gulags have yet to apologise to the women for the regime of terror and brutality to which they subjected them; this is a disgrace. No criminal proceedings have ever been taken against the orders or against individuals who committed crimes in their name. The Government's provision of compensation and benefits is not, and never can be, a substitute for establishing the truth about what happened in these dreadful places. I echo the call by my party colleague, Deputy Mary Lou McDonald, on the Minister for Justice and Equality to clarify when legislation will be introduced to provide health services to these women.
I am concerned about reports over the past few days about the future of post offices in rural Ireland. I agree with a number of my colleagues who are concerned about this. Over the years, rural post offices have been lost throughout the countryside and now rural towns are beginning to lose them. If business is transferred to banks, there will be no option but to close post offices in towns and villages in rural Ireland. Ballintogher post office in County Sligo is under threat and there is a great deal of talk about it. Some people have difficulty using banks. Those who cannot use machines to lodge and take out money are simply not wanted by the banks because there are no staff to assist them. We should build up rural post offices, especially in towns and villages, to make sure that services are retained.
I second Senator Mooney's amendment.
I support Senator Hayden's call for a debate on the issue of mortgage arrears. Repossessions are being ramped up. It is six years since the issue was first raised in the House and, as predicted, we are approaching a serious juncture where families are losing their homes. I have acted as an intermediary on behalf of people who are having difficulty with two financial institutions and despite the fact that these institutions trumpeted the potential for a full array of solutions such as mortgage to rent and so on, they have refused to give these options to people and are now moving to repossess. The reality is the code of conduct on mortgage arrears is not working and Government action on this has left the fox firmly in control of the henhouse. The fox, having showing restraint heretofore, is beginning to eat the hens and people are losing out. I seek an urgent debate on this issue.
I thank the Cathaoirleach for selecting my matter on the Adjournment.
I agree with Senator Norris that the GSOC issue is becoming a joke. The Taoiseach announced last night that there would be an inquiry and we all agree with that. The Minister for Justice and Equality then marched into the House and rubbished this statement, saying it will be just a review and then he proclaimed the result by saying there is no evidence of bugging. This is ridiculous; it is dictatorial; and it is borderline fascism.
The scenario where people are going to have a review of the documentation sounds like a Supreme Court case. The only difference, however, is that in a court case, the public sees what goes on and the documentation is reviewed. God only knows what terms of reference the Minister, Deputy Shatter, will conjure up to ensure his proclaimed result follows through and is announced in due course. If the Labour Party wants to feel it has scored a goal on this one and dragged Fine Gael kicking and screaming over the coals to have an inquiry, let it be a real inquiry.
The Senator is way over time. I call Senator Conway.
It should not be a whitewash that has already been prescribed by a Minister in denial.
The information put on the record of the House by Senator Whelan, and supported by Senator Kelly, is of a serious nature. I would like to hear answers to the matter they raised. It is incumbent on the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland to make a public statement clarifying the position today, not tomorrow or next week.
I agree with the sentiments of all colleagues on all sides of the House on the critical role the post office plays in our communities. There will be a presentation later this afternoon in Buswells Hotel about research on the future of the post office. Last week, I came across a scenario in Clare which was bizarre to say the least. An older person wanted to lodge coins into his bank account but was told by the lady at the bank’s customer service desk that there was a specific day to do so. It would be appropriate for the House to have a debate on the protocols for over-the-counter banking in rural areas. To think that an older person had to go away with his bag of coins and return the following day is ludicrous in a modern society. Not everyone is able to use these automated bank machines. It is particularly apt as our society is getting older. The banks, predominantly owned by the taxpayer, need to be reflective of the society in which they are serving.
I welcome the Cathaoirleach back from Japan. I did not know he was there and I have no yen to go there myself, certainly not this side of May.
Following on from what Senators Whelan and Kelly raised, it is clear there is just a pretence of consultation with people on the establishment of pylons and high voltage lines across the country and the erection of wind turbines. There cannot even be an apparent conflict of interest. Accordingly, it is important that we get answers as to whether there was the appropriate declaration of a potential conflict of interest.
On a related issue, successive Governments have recognised the importance of the horse and greyhound industries. The Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, was asked in this House about EirGrid’s decision to locate pylons close to areas where thoroughbred horses are bred. This is a significant health issue for humans and animals. We were told then that representatives of the industry had been speaking with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, with meetings held in December and another one scheduled for later. These representatives have made a genuine case regarding the effect pylons would have on thoroughbred horse breeding and training. The Minister said that while it was not the responsibility of the Department Agriculture, Food and the Marine, if it had an impact on it, it would make a submission to the relevant Minister and EirGrid. People with brood mares on the proposed routes fear the pylons would lead to increased numbers of slipped foals.
Submissions have been made but has EirGrid responded? Will we see the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine treated with the same level of contempt by EirGrid as that experienced by many communities across the country? What is the position of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on this matter? What has happened to its submission on this particular issue?
I want to raise some more mundane issues which are important to us as taxpayers. A recent report in a Sunday newspaper indicated that the legislation put in place to deal with the cost of drugs is not having an effect or benefit. It is of concern that we are spending over €2 billion per annum on drugs and pharmaceutical products, three to four, and in some cases, five times above the cost paid in other European countries. It is an issue on which we need to focus and ensure the relevant legislation is followed through by pharmacies and medical practitioners.
We should have the Minister for Health into the House on the new proposed contracts for general practitioners, GPs. Last Monday night, I attended a meeting of over 250 GPs in Cork who are concerned that their new contracts were put online before they saw them. That is not the way to do business. This is a 40-page contract which contains a clause that no GP can speak on any health issue. That is a gagging clause that they will not accept. It is wrong this contract was put online before there was consultation with GP representatives. GPs play an important part in providing a comprehensive medical service at local level. If we do not have them onside, we will further clog up our hospital systems. The Minister should set out to the House how the consultation process will proceed and conclude. The impression being given by the Department is that this is already written in stone. It is not acceptable.
We must ensure the review of GSOC, the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, is thorough for the confidence of the nation, not just a window-dressing exercise to play down the seriousness of what is at stake. When we see the terms of reference, we will know how serious it is being taken. When will we know the terms of reference?
I put down an Adjournment matter on the 13,000 Irish Nationwide Building Society home loans at risk of being sold to foreign bidders by IBRC. Will the Minister for Finance insist on the protection of Irish law and practice for the home owners affected? Senator MacSharry spoke about the code of conduct for mortgage arrears not being adequate. If those 13,000 home loans are sold to foreign bidders, they will not even have the protection of the code. They will be at risk of an increase surcharge on their interest payments and lose the protection of eight months for repossessions. They will be thrown to the wolves. Next up the line, it looks like Ulster Bank is prepared to sell off our mortgages. Where is the protection? The market might be ready for a sell-off by the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA. While that might be good for the country’s bottom line, we cannot sell out home owners’ rights. Many of them are not in arrears. At a minimum, we must ensure those Irish home owners’ loans that might be sold to a foreign bidder have the protection of Irish law and practice.
Yesterday, the environment committee had a charm offensive launched at it by two representatives from several wind energy organisations, Bord na Móna and Element Power Ireland. There was much marketing speak with claims that local communities would receive €250 million in 25 years and benefit from educational bursaries while homes would become more energy efficient and get support with electricity bills.
We were told that 185 m turbines were the most efficient, which is why they were going to be used. We were also told that only 1,000 wind turbines would be erected in the midlands, not the 2,000 to 3,000 figure that was put out and was misunderstood by the communities.
What we were not told, particularly by Bord na Móna, although I asked this, was whether it was entering into strategic alliances with private companies, which indeed it is. Bord na Móna is a semi-State body that is answerable to the Government, which is answerable to the people. Now, the company is proposing to link up with companies that are sponsored and financed by investment banks from America. They are going to help spend taxpayers' money in a project that is doomed to failure. The company did not ask any of the economic questions I put to it in regard to the cost of the power into the future and the subsidy the Irish taxpayer will pay to continue this daft notion of wind energy.
I want to support my two colleagues on what they said earlier. I further want to ask for a debate in this House on the future of wind energy. We have been asking for this for months. I do not accept that just because we are in a consultation period we cannot have a debate. Surely, when there is a consultation with the public, that is the time for the elected representatives to debate the issues so the public can see the outcome. I call again for this debate to be held and I ask the Deputy Leader to take note of this call.
Senator Barrett referred to the fracking situation. The news came through just this week that a British company, Nebula Resources, is to explore for shale gas in the Irish Sea. We have turned our back on fracking when we have not even had a discussion on it. We must look at what has happened in other parts of the world, particularly the United States. Ten years ago, the US was importing so much oil that it was very concerned about costs but, since fracking began, it has totally turned around that situation. The cost of fuel has come down dramatically and there have been practically no cases along the lines of the concerns that are expressed here.
I am not arguing for fracking but for a discussion on fracking, particularly if it is going to come into the Irish Sea. If it is done by a British company in the Irish Sea, I do not know what particular rights we or the British have there. However, it seems outrageous we are turning our back on something like this. Whenever anybody comes up with a suggestion, there seems to be a lobby in this country that says, "No, no, no. Not us. Not in my back yard". Let us at least have the discussion and make sure we find a way to make ourselves competitive in the years ahead.
The issue raised by Senator Colm Burke was one that certainly startled me. He was referring to prescription charges, in particular for generic medicines. It is some six months since we passed the law in Ireland allowing pharmacists to substitute a generic product for a branded product. I mention this because of the startling figures given during the week for a particular product, Lipitor. It was selling for €10 and €11 throughout Ireland, with no generic substitute being offered, whereas the same product is on sale in Newry for €6, or £5. I do not understand, if there is supposed to be competition, why the public are not getting the benefits of this competition. We passed the law here to allow pharmacists to substitute a generic product for the prescribed product, and it does not seem to be happening. We seem to be charging outrageous prices here compared to the North.
I support my Labour Party colleagues in their call for a debate on the future of wind energy. Some very serious and significant allegations have been made in the House this morning and I believe they must be responded to. When we are talking about such significant projects that have a potential environmental impact throughout the country, there must be total openness and transparency in all matters relating to those projects.
I would also support the call from Senator Conway for a debate in the House on how the banking system is treating its customers, and also the impact on the post office system. I can certainly confirm what he said in regard to the banks being unwilling to take coins on particular days. I know of one ludicrous situation, having been involved in an event over Christmas. When our treasurer went to lodge the money after the event, the bank was prepared to take the notes but sent him away again with the coins and told him to come back the following day. It is outrageous in this day and age.
It is happening all over.
This actually happened. The man told me he had to take time off work the following day to lodge money from a charitable fund-raiser. It is outrageous and scandalous.
On a positive note, I want to welcome the fact €30 million was announced yesterday for improving energy efficiency in local authority housing. This will impact positively on approximately 10,000 houses during 2014 and 25,000 homes were upgraded during 2013. I welcome this and hope this investment will continue until all local authority homes are brought to a satisfactory level of energy efficiency.
I join Senators Landy, Whelan and Kelly and the others who raised the issue of the need for a debate on energy policy. We have all been calling for that debate to happen in this House over recent weeks and months. There is a bizarre situation where we have a Minister with responsibility for this area who is not listening to public representatives in government or opposition. He is not listening to communities in regard to their fears about industrial wind farms which are essentially set up, if we are to be honest about it, to make profit for a small number of individuals and will not be serving the best needs or interests of the Irish people and Irish citizens. The power that is generated will most likely be exported and will not be used in this State at all. That is not on.
With regard to the high voltage power lines and EirGrid's plans to proceed with the Grid West project and the North-South interconnector, the Minister put in place a commission which he tells us is going to look at the costs and benefits of putting the high voltage power lines underground. However, we know the commission is going to be asked to look at evidence and an analysis of undergrounding by EirGrid, when its position on this is very clear, namely, it has been against undergrounding from the outset. As recently as last month, the CEO of EirGrid was before one of the Oireachtas committees, where he again repeated that undergrounding was simply not an option in his mind. Yet, this commission has been set up which is going to look at analyses and studies carried out by an organisation which has its mind made up a long time ago on this issue. We need to take a step back and rethink this but that is not going to be possible if the Minister himself continues with what I see as a very arrogant approach of not listening to people within his own party, within the Opposition and in communities throughout the country who will be affected by this.
I would go further. If one looks at what is happening in my own county of Waterford, where we are planning to put these unsightly pylons of up to 45 m in height through the beautiful heart of the Comeragh Mountains, it is an act of vandalism for that to be happening. For the Minister to simply dismiss the concerns of all involved is regrettable. We need a debate on energy policy.
As somebody who organised a renewable energy conference in Dublin Castle during the year, I know there has been a lot of negative comment. Notwithstanding the soundbites on the Order of Business in the Seanad, I do not believe it is an appropriate place to discuss this but it is an appropriate place to raise issues, such as conflicts of interest. I was at the environment committee yesterday from 2 p.m. until 7 p.m. to hear from three different companies. A question was asked about conflicts of interest and the three companies all said there were none. Bord na Móna was present although Sustainable Energy Ireland was not. I believe questions raised in that manner must be answered. I call on Sustainable Energy Ireland to come out today and say if there is a conflict of interest, or even a perceived conflict of interest.
We should have another debate on wind energy in the Chamber, although that is not what I wish to speak about.
As a spokesperson on the environment, it is incumbent on me to state that there are both positive and negative aspects to wind energy. We always tend to hear about the negatives but the positives must also be aired.
There are more negatives than positives.
Yes, but we cannot discuss the matter in detail on the Order of Business.
I wish to refer to Bitcoin, the new currency which originated online and which is trading in Ireland. It is a virtual currency but it is also a real one that is worth $119 per unit. The authorities in Germany have made moves to recognise Bitcoin and to discover how they can tax transactions made in the currency. There may be a possibility of our not being at the races when it comes to the euro and Bitcoin. The authorities in America have taken an alternative view and have referred to the validity of the currency and the fact that it is being used to facilitate certain underground transactions. Trade in Bitcoin is happening in Ireland and I request a debate on the matter. It may not be possible to regulate the currency. I am not stating that Bitcoin is bad and it could certainly be good in the context of facilitating transactions online. Ireland is a high-tech country. It must recognise Bitcoin, use it if there are benefits to doing so and, if possible, regulate it. A previous speaker referred to the banks not trading in coins. Trading in coins is taking place but it is taking place online in the form of Bitcoin.
I support colleagues who are seeking a debate on energy. Such a debate should be open-ended and people should be open-minded in respect of it. We do not have all the answers and it is not possible for us to become experts overnight on the pros and cons of wind, wave, fracking or other methods of producing energy. We must all agree, however, that in order for our country and its economy to grow, thrive and succeed in the long term, we must obtain access to the cheapest sources of energy. That issue must be placed at the very core of the debate on this matter. The strong economies of Europe have access to much cheaper sources of energy than Ireland. It is very difficult, therefore, for the various industries involved in job creation to compete in view of the current level of energy costs. That matter must also be placed at the core of the debate.
Will the Deputy Leader comment on the ongoing saga involving the GSOC? We are now well into the second week of the latter. Yesterday, the Minister for Justice and Equality announced that a retired High Court judge is going to take charge of some type of review into this matter. He also advised that he will publish the terms of reference of that review shortly. I ask the Deputy Leader to ensure that those terms of reference be debated and approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas. If the review's terms of reference are not widely supported across the Oireachtas, we will again be setting out on a journey towards an unknown destination. This House and the Lower House should engage in a calm debate on those terms of reference. If people feel that the latter should be amended, then they should be given the opportunity to say so. If a debate such as that to which I refer were facilitated, it would show goodwill on the part of the Minister to try to bring about a satisfactory conclusion to this almost two-week old saga. I request that the terms of reference be brought before both Houses - for debate and approval - when they are published. The Deputy Leader is far more expert in legal matters than I am but I am of the view that there is precedent for reviews such as that in question having their terms of reference approved by the Houses of the Oireachtas.
I wish to seek clarification from the Government side with regard to an issue relating to the Order of Business for the next week or so. Last week we were promised that Report Stage of the Protection of Children's Health from Tobacco Smoke would be taken in the House. When I withdrew my amendment to last Tuesday's Order of Business, it was on the basis that Report Stage of the legislation in question would be take place this week. Has time been made available to facilitate the latter?
There was understandable outrage last year when the editor of a current affairs journal in Thailand, Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, was sentenced to 11 years in prison for violating that country's lèse majesté laws, which make it an offence to tarnish the good name of any member of the royal family of Thailand. I was reminded of this matter when I recently discovered that the new GP contract which is being implemented in order to facilitate free medical care for those under six years of age contains its own little Irish version of the concept of lèse majesté. Said contract states that the GPs who sign it "shall not do anything to prejudice the name or reputation of the HSE". Put purely and simply, this is a gagging clause.
They do it themselves.
Yes, I accept the point from my learned colleague. This gagging clause should be withdrawn.
Hear, hear.
The only people who can damage the name of any public body are those who work for such a body. This matter must be seen in the context of the other issued I have raised in recent weeks regarding a respected medical journalist who wrote an article in which he made the same criticisms which have continually been made during the past year about the current policy on discretionary and non-discretionary medical cards and who received a letter in which he was threatened with legal action from a PR specialist acting on behalf of the HSE and informed of the consequences which might arise if he did not desist from blackening the good name of the organisation. I am delighted that Senator Bacik will be replying to the Order of Business and I would be grateful for her opinion on this. There should be a general principle whereby government bodies do not have a right to sue in respect of their own reputations. We live in a vibrant democracy, with a vibrant press and appropriately querulous journalists and concerned citizens, and we must protect the right of people to question the activities of the Government and its agencies. I would like the specific matter of the gagging order to which I refer to be brought to the attention of the Minister for Health. I am of the view that it should be removed from the contract.
Senator Mooney welcomed the decision to establish the independent review into the matters arising from the alleged bugging of Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC. Most people - not everyone - broadly welcomed the fact that an independent review is being established. Many individuals sought such a review. I recently criticised the Government's handling of this matter on radio. Many of us were concerned with regard to the drip-feeding of information from different sources as to what actually occurred and, in particular, the very recent information which emerged in respect of the technical findings contained in the Verrimus report. We are all operating in the dark because we have not seen that report or the letter of clarification provided by GSOC to the Minister, Deputy Shatter, on Friday last in respect of his request for clarification. The Minister will be appearing before the Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions later today, a development I very much welcome. It is important that a committee of these Houses should hear directly from him as to the sequence of events relating to this matter and why the relevant information did not emerge more quickly. It will also be useful, however, to have a review carried out by a retired judge. A number of names have been circulated in that regard. It is essential and extremely important that there should be a clarification as to the sequence of events with regard to exactly what happened in this case and that the drip-feeding of information should cease.
Senator Mooney also sought a debate on the viability of the post office network. He referred to the briefing to be held later for Oireachtas Members and his concerns with regard to the use of An Post's facilities for electronic fund transfers. The Senator is seeking a debate with the Minister for Social Protection on this matter today. I cannot accept his amendment to the Order of Business. I would be happy to ask the Leader's office to arrange a debate on the viability of post offices. Having sought a briefing on the matter, I know the Government is committed to sustaining a strong and viable An Post and supports the maintenance of the maximum number of economically viable post offices. Ireland has one of the most extensive networks of post offices per head of population in Europe. There are 1,145 post offices and 141 postal agents. Some 65% of post offices are in rural areas and we are all aware of their huge importance to communities. I grew up in a small village in Cork and I distinctly recall the enormous role the post office there played in people's lives in the context of facilitating telephone calls through its exchange, postal deliveries, etc.
As a commercial semi-State body, An Post faces a challenge. Mail volumes have fallen by 25% in the past five years. We are witnessing a real challenge to the traditional business of post offices.
The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport and Communications produced a report on the sustainable future of the post office network in March 2013. I do not think we had a debate on that report, but I will check. If not, we could have a debate on the report and address many of the issues raised by colleagues. An Post is now bidding for other business, given the fall in mail volumes. For example, the local property tax is paid via An Post outlets, and An Post has been selected by the Department of Social Protection, following competitive tender, to provide over-the-counter cash services to social welfare recipients. I understand that it will pitch strongly for the e-payment of social welfare from the Department. That has not yet been allocated.
The closure of individual post offices is a matter for the board of An Post. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the Minister for Social Protection do not have a direct role in that, but I have set out Government policy as far as An Post is concerned and the position in which the company finds itself. However, I cannot accept the amendment today.
Senator Paul Coghlan agreed on the welcome review of the GSOC controversy and rightly pointed out that it will take this issue out of the political arena, although I think the Oireachtas committee hearing is important today. The Senator also raised a concern about the liquidators of IBRC and a potential conflict of interest. I understand there is a case currently before the courts on this, so perhaps I will not comment any further on it other than to note the Senator's comments.
I am always happy to agree with my friend and colleague, Senator Norris, and to agree in particular that we are lucky to live in a wonderful country, especially on such a lovely sunny day. His comments on Java Republic made me think that it is time for us all to wake up and smell the coffee. He also mentioned the bugging of his own telephone in the 1980s. I seem to remember in the 1980s it was a badge of honour for all of us to have our phones bugged. We had our phones bugged in the Trinity College Students' Union, and we used to boast about it. Sadly, I cannot agree with the Senator's comment that the review is a waste of time. I think it will be very helpful to have an independent adjudicator come in and make sense of the myriad of different allegations, including the serious allegations of bugging at GSOC. The big question is whether GSOC was bugged and, if so, by whom. We still do not have an answer to that critical question and it is very important we get that. An independent review is the way to do it.
Senator Norris also referred to the debate on homophobia and free speech last night. I commend Senator Zappone on taking the initiative on it, which we all supported. I was very proud to second the motion she put forward. I thought it was an excellent debate. I thought the comments of the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, were also really important because he focused on the need to address the so-called 50-50 rule in the lead-up to a referendum debate on marriage equality next year. It is good that we have that debate now and that he invited the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland to look again at how that 50-50 rule is being implemented in practice. There is a question as to whether it is a rule that binds broadcasters. That was a very useful debate, and I am sorry that Senator Mullen was not here to listen to it and to the Minister's response in particular.
I had no knowledge in advance of the visit by Senators and one Deputy to Japan. I have made inquiries with the Seanad Leader's office. I understand that the invitation did not come through that office. In spite of being the leader of the Labour Party in the Seanad, I was not aware of the visit in advance, nor was the Labour Party Whip. I made queries internally within the party as to how the invitation was processed. It is not an invitation I would have wanted myself, but I wanted to see the process and I understand it came through the Whip's office. However, I will make further inquiries as to how an invitation apparently to Senators came through a Whip's office.
Can the Senator pursue this vigorously? Previously the Japanese refused a delegation from the Seanad because they wanted only the Lower House. They were very particular about this and I think it very important that we inquire into the intervention of the Dáil Whip in Senate business.
I thank Senator Norris for raising it. I will pursue it vigorously. The process is the issue here. Senator Hayden made the important point that no woman Member of either House was on the visit to Japan, and that clearly is a matter of concern. We want to portray an image of a modern Parliament and it is wrong that we should have all male delegations.
Senator Hayden also looked for a debate on banking and mortgage arrears, and the worrying increase in mortgage repossessions in Dublin. That is a matter of real concern. We have asked that the Minister for Finance come in next week. I advised the House of that yesterday and I have not got confirmation yet, but we hope to have him here next week.
Senator Byrne also referred to GSOC, and I have dealt with that matter.
Senator Whelan is seeking a debate on the wind energy industry, and raised certain matters about the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. I understand from Senator Keane that while there was a full discussion of this on the agenda of the environment committee, the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland was not before it. Perhaps the committee should calls its representatives in, given what has been said by colleagues, but certainly I will seek a debate on wind energy and energy policy in this House. We will seek to pursue further a debate on the Bill proposed by Senator Kelly on behalf of the Labour Party in the Seanad, which passed Second Stage. I think a number of others raised issues about that Bill. I know the Leader's office is actively pursuing Private Members' Bills that have passed Second Stage in the Seanad and which we want to see continue through the Seanad and then into the Dáil, because we do not want to see these Bills hanging on forever. We are trying to pursue that.
Senator Barrett is also seeking a debate on energy policy. He also referred to comments by Mr. Barroso concerning the future of an independent Scotland. I agree entirely with Senator Barrett that matters on domestic referendums should be left to the people, so in Scotland they should be left to the people of Scotland. In our experience in Ireland, it has not been helpful for senior EU figures to intervene in any referendum campaign. I could not comment on that, other than to say that as a person of Czech descent, I regret the division of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, but it was very important that they enter the EU as separate, independent countries.
Senator Kelly referred to his own Bill on wind energy and, as I said, we need to hasten the progress of that Bill and other Private Members' Bills before the House. I am also seeking a response to the question on the conflict of interest. The environment committee might be more appropriate. Representatives of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland could be brought before the committee and questioned by Oireachtas Members. While we can have a useful debate with the Minister on energy policy, it would also be important that the very specific issues raised by Senators Whelan, Kelly and others would be addressed before an Oireachtas committee, with a to and fro between witnesses and committee members.
Senator Ó Clochartaigh spoke about the Magdalen laundries. I agree with him that delays are regrettable in the process of securing redress for the survivors of the laundries. I know that progress has been made, and the Senator accepts that himself, but clearly it needs to be pursued further. I will write to the relevant Department - I think it is the Department of Justice and Equality - and I suggest the Senator does the same in order to get more rapid progress.
Senator Comiskey spoke about the need to build up rural post offices, and I dealt with that matter.
Senator MacSharry seconded the amendment to the Order of Business and also called for a debate on mortgage arrears and repossessions. I hope we will have that next week, if we get confirmation from the Minister for Finance. Senator Conway spoke about the wind energy debate and also referred to the fact that some banks do not take coin lodgements on particular days. I do not think this is only an issue in rural Ireland. The Dame Street branch of Bank of Ireland is quite limited in some of the functions it carries out. For example, international transfers of money now have to be done online. This is a general issue on which we could have a debate.
Senator Mullen called for a debate on wind energy and referred to the effect of pylons on thoroughbred horse breeding. We had a debate on pylons in this House recently with the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, but I will seek the debate on energy, as I have said.
Senator Burke raised the issue of the cost of drugs and the seeming delay in any impact from the important legislation passed some months ago which provided for the prescription of generic medicines. I agree entirely that it seems extraordinary that there has not been more progress. I know there has been some progress, with reports of some chemists offering generic drugs as a general rule, and these are much more cost effective. Senator Burke also raised the issue of the GP contract. We received a briefing recently from the Minister of State, Deputy White, at a Labour Party conference. He published the draft contract with GPs, which was developed by the Department of Health and the HSE for the very important aim that all children aged under six will now be able to access GP services for free. That will mean an additional 240,000 children by this summer. It is a wonderful development and this Government can be very proud of it. The draft contract has been placed online in the interests of transparency, so that everyone can see it and so that people can input into it. The Minister of State has met with representatives of the IMO and the Irish College of General Practitioners. There is ongoing consultation concerning the terms of the contract and it is premature to see any particular clause within it as being set in stone, as Senator Crown said.
I emphasise that and the Minister of State, Deputy White, has also emphasised it. I will ask-----
Will the Deputy Leader accept a point of information?
I am not sure I can.
I am asking the Deputy Leader, when it is not yet set in stone, to bring it to their attention because we have grave reservations about it but it will be very hard to-----
I am aware of the clause. The other key features of the contract are hugely important. They will maintain choice of doctor policy and 24-7 out-of-hours service and provide for GP participation through the primary care team model and also provide for integrated multi-disciplinary primary care services. Again, this is a hugely important development to strengthen primary care and keep people out of hospitals and acute services where possible. The contract will also be more comprehensive than the existing GMS contract, which is, again, very welcome. It will cover prevention and health promotion as well as diagnosis and treatment. There is a range of other terms and conditions. Somebody said it was a 40-page contract. It proposes a defined contract duration of five years with extension for further periods of five years. There is a great deal in it and there is ongoing discussion and consultation with the doctors' representatives. We can certainly ask the Minister of State to come to the House to brief us or debate with us developments in primary care. I understand he did so relatively recently and I am sure he would be happy to do so again.
Senator Healy Eames spoke about the GSOC issue and raised a separate issue regarding the projected sale of IBRC mortgages. I gave a very full answer on that question yesterday, which was raised by a number of people who had very real concerns about the 13,000 persons who could be affected by this - concerns I share. As I explained yesterday, the sale has not yet been made. NAMA is one of the bodies to which the business may be sold. It is expected that the code of conduct will be adhered to by whoever buys it. I gave a full answer yesterday and the Senator can look at it on the record.
Senator Landy again raised the issue of wind energy and sought a debate on the future of wind energy. I will seek that as a matter of urgency and will pursue the Bill sponsored by Senator Kelly. Senator Quinn sought a debate on fracking. Perhaps a debate on the future of energy policy more generally would be appropriate so that we could encompass that because I take Senator Quinn's point that sometimes we come to these things with preconceived notions and it is useful to have a fuller debate on issues like fracking and wind energy. Senator Quinn also spoke about generic drugs and the difficulty with the seeming delay in the implementation of that new legislation in pharmacies.
Senator Mullins spoke about wind energy and banking and welcomed the retrofitting of local authority homes, which we all very much welcome. Senator Cullinane sought a debate on energy policy and pylons. We had a debate quite recently with the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources on pylons. I understand it was just before Christmas.
Senator Keane very helpfully spoke about the hearing of the Oireachtas Committee on the Environment, Community and Local Government yesterday. She also raised the issue of Bitcoins and the new developments in the US. It is of huge interest. I attended a conference on white-collar crime recently where senior Europol figures and gardaí expressed real concern about the potential for criminality, for example, the silk road and the use of Bitcoins to assist in white-collar crime and organised crime generally. It is interesting to see that the US has gone down the road of regulation rather than simply seeing Bitcoin as something to be rejected out of hand as a way of pursuing criminality. I agree with Senator Keane that we need to look at taking a similar approach to that in the US and to look at how we regulate the use of Bitcoin.
I said we should take an approach similar to that used in Germany. The US has taken the opposite approach.
I apologise. I misunderstood the Senator. She said we should go down the same road as Germany. I believe it is in Germany where the ATMs now accept Bitcoin.
Frankfurt's way.
Perhaps for once, we could take Frankfurt's road on this.
Senator Bradford sought a debate on wind energy and the GSOC and argued that the terms of reference of the independent review would be agreed in the Oireachtas. I agree with him on that. We should have a debate on the terms of reference when they are presented.
Senator Crown asked about the progress of the Bill to prevent smoking in cars. I consulted with the Leader's office on that. The Bill is very close to completion and we hope to have it back with us on Report Stage in the next few weeks. The office will consult directly with Senator Crown on the timing of it. The plan is to have the Report Stage amendments finalised before it comes in here so that there is no further delay before it can go on to the Dáil. We would all welcome that because we do not want to see it pass through here and then face enormous delays before it goes to the Dáil. We all want to see it in as a polished and final a state as possible when it leaves this House.
Senator Crown also raised the issue of the GP contract, which I have covered.
Senator Paschal Mooney has moved an amendment to the Order of Business, "That a debate with the Minister for Social Protection on the arrangements between her Department and An Post for the cashing of social welfare cheques with the view to maintaining the viability of post offices be taken today." Is the amendment being pressed?
Tá
- Barrett, Sean D.
- Byrne, Thomas.
- Crown, John.
- Cullinane, David.
- Daly, Mark.
- Leyden, Terry.
- MacSharry, Marc.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Norris, David.
- Ó Clochartaigh, Trevor.
- Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
- Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
- O'Donovan, Denis.
- O'Sullivan, Ned.
- Power, Averil.
- Quinn, Feargal.
- Reilly, Kathryn.
- Walsh, Jim.
- White, Mary M.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.
Níl
- Bacik, Ivana.
- Brennan, Terry.
- Burke, Colm.
- Clune, Deirdre.
- Coghlan, Eamonn.
- Coghlan, Paul.
- Comiskey, Michael.
- Conway, Martin.
- D'Arcy, Jim.
- D'Arcy, Michael.
- Gilroy, John.
- Hayden, Aideen.
- Henry, Imelda.
- Keane, Cáit.
- Kelly, John.
- Landy, Denis.
- Mac Conghail, Fiach.
- Moloney, Marie.
- Moran, Mary.
- Mulcahy, Tony.
- Mullins, Michael.
- Naughton, Hildegarde.
- Noone, Catherine.
- O'Keeffe, Susan.
- O'Neill, Pat.
- Sheahan, Tom.
- van Turnhout, Jillian.
- Whelan, John.
Tá
- Bacik, Ivana.
- Brennan, Terry.
- Burke, Colm.
- Clune, Deirdre.
- Coghlan, Eamonn.
- Coghlan, Paul.
- Comiskey, Michael.
- Conway, Martin.
- D'Arcy, Jim.
- D'Arcy, Michael.
- Gilroy, John.
- Hayden, Aideen.
- Henry, Imelda.
- Keane, Cáit.
- Kelly, John.
- Landy, Denis.
- Mac Conghail, Fiach.
- Moloney, Marie.
- Moran, Mary.
- Mulcahy, Tony.
- Mullins, Michael.
- Naughton, Hildegarde.
- Noone, Catherine.
- O'Donnell, Marie-Louise.
- O'Keeffe, Susan.
- O'Neill, Pat.
- Sheahan, Tom.
- van Turnhout, Jillian.
- Whelan, John.
Níl
- Barrett, Sean D.
- Byrne, Thomas.
- Crown, John.
- Cullinane, David.
- Daly, Mark.
- Leyden, Terry.
- MacSharry, Marc.
- Mooney, Paschal.
- Norris, David.
- O'Donovan, Denis.
- O'Sullivan, Ned.
- Ó Clochartaigh, Trevor.
- Ó Domhnaill, Brian.
- Ó Murchú, Labhrás.
- Power, Averil.
- Quinn, Feargal.
- Reilly, Kathryn.
- Walsh, Jim.
- White, Mary M.
- Wilson, Diarmuid.