Results 4,261-4,280 of 23,109 for speaker:Paddy Burke

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Second Stage (23 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Second Stage (23 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: When is it proposed to sit again?

Seanad: Water and Sewerage Schemes (23 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: The Senator is straying from the point.

Seanad: National Drugs Strategy (23 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I will allow Senator Buttimer to ask a brief supplementary question.

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I remind Senators that they may speak only once on Report Stage, except the proposer of the amendment, who may reply to discussion on the amendment. Also on Report Stage, each amendment must be seconded. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady. Amendment No. 1 is in the names of Senators Norris and Bacik and arises out of Committee proceedings.

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Yes, you are.

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Amendments Nos. 2, 6, 9, 24, 27 and 28 are related. Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 are related and are alternatives to amendment No. 6. Amendments Nos. 2, 6 to 9, inclusive, 24, 27 and 28 may be discussed together by agreement.

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Is Senator Norris proposing we do not take them together?

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Amendment No. 3 in the names of Senators Mullen and Quinn is deemed to be out of order as it involves a potential charge on Revenue. Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 in the names of Senators Norris and Bacik are also deemed to be out of order for the same reason.

Seanad: Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill 2008: Report and Final Stages (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Amendment No. 33 in the names of Senators Fitzgerald and McFadden is deemed out of order as it involves a potential charge on the Revenue.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Senator Boyle, without interruption.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Senator Boyle to conclude.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I ask the Senator to conclude.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I thank Senator O'Toole for sharing his time. It is difficult to know what one can say in one minute.

Seanad: Dairy Industry: Motion (24 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I agree with him that a full debate should be held on the future of the dairy industry in the House. I compliment the co-operative movement on the support it gives to the dairy industry and the price it pays for milk compared with that paid by the retailers. I hope the Government will continue the intervention prices for butter beyond 31 August. Butter should be allowed to be used in...

Seanad: Financial Measures (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Second Stage (25 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Mansergh.

Seanad: Financial Measures (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Second Stage (25 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Seanad: Financial Measures (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Committee Stage (25 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: On section 3, I wish to raise the issue of benefits. The Bill lists a number of bodies, the pension schemes of which have been transferred, including Trinity College, University College Dublin, University College Cork, National University of Ireland, Galway and National University of Ireland, Maynooth. The semi-State bodies concerned include Forfás, Bord Bia, the Arts Council, the...

Seanad: Financial Measures (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009: Committee Stage (25 Jun 2009)

Paddy Burke: I do not fully understand that. Does the Minister of State mean that if they had different arrangements, other than a Civil Service pension, these will be honoured by the taxpayer? If that is the case, the taxpayer is being exposed to future liabilities and would it not be desirable to know whether such special arrangements exist? I thought the State would be taking over these schemes and...