Results 4,021-4,040 of 4,608 for speaker:Joe O'Toole

Seanad: Order of Business (25 Feb 2010)

Joe O'Toole: From the response we got from the Leader we understood there would be a debate within the next couple of days.

Seanad: Order of Business (25 Feb 2010)

Joe O'Toole: I still think it is crucial. The Leader himself has been clear on the importance of this debate. I agree with him in regard to the issues we have to consider, including the third banking force, our relationship with Europe, the timetable for NAMA and the Government's best projections for the economy for the rest of this year. I would like to debate the figures in the budget, which appear...

Seanad: Order of Business (25 Feb 2010)

Joe O'Toole: Hear, hear.

Seanad: Order of Business (25 Feb 2010)

Joe O'Toole: Hear, hear.

Seanad: Order of Business (2 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: We must be very careful on the issue of educational qualifications at second and third level. One of the great problems in the last ten years was we confused education with qualifications. It is very easy to talk about those issues that are easily quantifiable but, given the state of the country, how do we ensure the education system will allow us to develop the next generation for every...

Seanad: Order of Business (3 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: With due respect, the Leader's comments are incorrect. The Committee on Procedure and Privileges has decided that on weeks when the House does not sit on a Tuesday, Private Members' business will begin at 5.30 p.m. The reason is that if it were to start earlier, with the long Order of Business, the Labour Party, Sinn Féin and other Members would not get to contribute to the debate. On...

Seanad: Order of Business (3 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: The Broadcasting Act was passed last year and one aspect of it concerns paying for the regulation of local and national radio through a levy imposed by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland. That is not unusual — it is regular and correct that those being regulated should pay for regulation. However, following the most challenging year in the history of broadcasting, with a reduction in...

Seanad: Order of Business (3 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: Is this not what the Senator objected to?

Seanad: Order of Business (3 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: I thought we were listening to the chairman of the party.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: Various groups within the community have suffered from the recession over the last couple of years. I suggest that those involved in various branches of the arts, such as sculptors, painters and writers, have probably suffered more than any other group. I appeal to my Fine Gael and Labour Party colleagues to reassess their position on the appointment of a part-time arts officer in the...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: We should invest in artistic events in areas like theatre, sculpting and painting, which are part and parcel of Irish life. I really think we need to look at this. It is a sad day for Ireland when two political parties oppose the investment of a minor amount of money in the arts. I should also mention that a library in Sallynoggin, which is one of the most deprived working-class areas of...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: It has to be done. However, I do not agree with the idea of giving responsibility for this system to the private fund managers who have created havoc in our financial services industry. The Opposition parties are completely right to say that is not the way to go forward. The most effective fund managers in this country over the last ten years have been the officials in the NTMA. That is...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: Hear, hear.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: The closure of libraries.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: I welcome the Minister of State. I am very disappointed with the attendance in the House today. This is a classic example of something that is really central to our debates on job creation, on the economy, on climate change and on energy security. I do not wish to make a personal criticism of anyone but there is a lack of understanding. It might be preferable to adjourn the debate and ask...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: ----as it is crucial. This happens on a regular basis. Every agriculture, energy and climate change spokespersons should be in attendance for this debate. I will not rehearse Senator Norris's points but they reflect my point of view and that of all the speakers so far, including on the Government side. This is crucial legislation and these proposals have the support of the whole...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: This is too important. I am sure none of my colleagues would mind coming back to tease this out further. If there are flaws in our argument as articulated by Senator Norris, the Minister of State should deal with them one by one. I know the Minister of State has heard arguments from an other side and they need to be examined. Apart from the obvious advantages, the Irish plant in Waterford...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: It is down there. Apart from the main argument, the other argument which needs to be examined includes carbon dioxide capture. Methane is 25 times stronger and more damaging than carbon dioxide. This plant can capture the carbon dioxide and it can be reused. We will save ourselves emissions costs and save ourselves paying for some of the carbon emissions trading units which the Government...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: It will mean increased tax revenue. We should invite the officials from the Department of Finance to come to the House to applaud us for making this case so they will be on our side and understand our proposal. This is also a question of sustainable rural development. If there is any downside to our proposal in terms of Government policy, I cannot find it. I acted as the Devil's advocate...

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Mar 2010)

Joe O'Toole: It would be a disgrace and we would be a laughing stock. If aspects of our amendments need to changed, then they can be changed and if a similar amendment with a slightly different emphasis needed to be tabled, then the Government side should do that. However, the Minister of State should recognise that the amendment is a serious attempt to improve and extend the legislation. I can...