David Norris (Independent)

I support Senator Brian Hayes in welcoming a human rights debate involving the situation in Colombia. As people refer to those known as the Colombia three who admitted to having been found using false passports in an area controlled by the FARC guerrillas, I am sure we will remember the Colombia 2,000 — the 2,000 people kidnapped, tortured and held for ransom by the FARC guerrillas.

I support what Senator Tuffy said and express my sympathy to the people killed and injured in the terrible bus accident. I join her in calling for a debate on road safety. I warned against the building of chicanes and the erection of railings in the city before people were killed. These are dangerous and we need to reconsider them. The debate should include discussing speed limits, an issue that was ventilated very intelligently on all sides of this House. Perhaps the Leader could confirm that the Government is proposing to introduce legislation to permit British commercial companies to be involved in operating speed cameras. That is something we should think about. The British experience has been negative in this regard. Since commercial companies have begun controlling these cameras, there has been a negative impact on road safety.

Perhaps the Leader will pass on my next point to the Minister. We have previously discussed the question of inconsistencies in speed limits, mentioning in particular the Stillorgan dual carriageway. There is now a new speed limit of 30 mph, reduced from 40 mph, on the dual carriageway. It was found that this had not even been done properly within the council's own by-laws and all the fines resulting from this new speed limit have now been reversed by the courts. If we are to have respect for the law, we must see consistency in speed limits.

We have been monitoring events in the Middle East. I ask for another debate on this matter, particularly as the International Court of Justice in The Hague is considering the issue of the wall being built by the Israelis. The British have said the wall is illegal but added an extraordinary second clause to the effect that it is wrong to go to the court. How morally bankrupt must one be to maintain these two incompatible ideas? During the last terrible suicide bombing near Liberty Bell Park, people got under the wall through a sewer. It does not even work. I would be grateful if we could continue to monitor the situation in the Middle East, particularly in the matter of the wall.