David Norris (Independent)

——whose socialist caring face has now been ripped off. When I left my meeting with him, I thought I had been given the sun, the moon and the stars, as most people do. As I walked down the corridor, the stars started to twinkle more dimly and the moon dimmed. As I emerged from Government Buildings, the sun went out. It has finally gone into eclipse here today.

As a democrat, I want to be helpful. I think the most helpful thing I can do is to withdraw the Bill and to make a constructive submission to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution tomorrow. That would be the best thing for me to do, rather than initiating a meaningless debate that would be an insult to me and an insult to the many people who would benefit from the Civil Partnership Bill 2004, including people in heterosexual relationships outside marriage.

I mentioned the All-Party Committee on the Constitution. I attempted to refer this matter to a more appropriate committee, the all-party committee on the family, as did many other professional people who made serious and reasoned submissions. My attempt to make such a referral was rejected because it was not deemed to be a proper matter for the committee's consideration. Like many other people, I hardly even received an acknowledgment. I am surprised by this development, but I know it has happened because the Taoiseach referred the matter to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution, even though it was not the most appropriate forum.

I agree with the leader of Fine Gael, who referred to the Government amendment as shabby. It is over-cautious. The Government has known for a long time that this Bill was in the pipeline. We had a briefing session a week ago. I gave more notice to the appropriate office than most people give in any circumstances. I said that as I acknowledge that such concerns exist, the best thing to do might be to adjourn the debate. The first part of the debate could be held this evening and we could be informed about the matters mentioned in the amendment at a later stage. I accept the Government's argument that the various reports will add to our knowledge.

To impose a guillotine on such an important measure is contrary to the tradition of the House. My Independent colleagues and I fight against such procedures. To be fair, most Senators on the Government side agree with us. Some 50 years have passed since a Bill initiated on this side of the House was allowed by any Government to pass onto the Statute Book. On that occasion, the Bill was proposed by the late Professor W. B. Stanford and provided for the humane treatment of pigs in abattoirs. I would have thought that Seanad Éireann thought sufficiently highly of its dignity to allow it to move on after 50 years, for example, by considering a social problem that is at the heart of the lived reality of so many people in this country.

A week ago, on Joe Duffy's "Liveline", I listened to a woman who had been bereaved. Family members had been very helpful to her until after the burial, when they went in and started to grab every single thing. This Bill would start to address such problems. I do not suggest——