Dan Boyle (Green Party)

I agree with Senators Coghlan and Buttimer in respect of the dumping of Cork hospital patient files. As someone who represents Cork, I was appalled by today's news reports and the likelihood that I might know some of the people whose details may have been made public as a result of what happened. Issues obviously arise in the context of the prosecution of existing data protection legislation and the need to examine whether it is adequate. The files date from the 1970s and 1980s and it may well be that the Data Protection Commissioner may not have a role because the legislation did not come into force until the end of the latter decade.

Senator Coghlan and others referred to the resolution in the pharmacists' dispute. This is a welcome development and it provides justification for not using the House as a means to prosecute the dispute any further. Members should assist in ensuring agreement can be reached between the Health Service Executive and pharmacists. I welcome that those who would have been affected by what was being threatened will not now feel the impact of the dispute.

Senator Coghlan inquired about the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill, which is awaiting Committee Stage in the Dáil. Some of the issues — and also the concerns expressed by Senator Ross yesterday — that might be addressed by the Bill might also be dealt with under the designated land (housing development) Bill the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government intends to publish before the summer and bring before the Houses later in the year.

Senators Norris, O'Reilly and Ross asked why time cannot be made available for the motion on Zimbabwe. I have no difficulty with having such a debate. The motion was ordered this way today due to precedent. We have dealt with recent motions in the same way, for example, regarding Ingrid Betancourt. It depends on the availability of a suitable Minister. I ask Members to share the sentiments included in the motion when they are asked to agree to it later. Time can be provided at a later time to discuss the impact of the motion itself and issues like the Middle East, which many Senators have raised today.

Senator Norris also asked that his motion, No. 3, be taken. While I am positively disposed towards it, I have received a response from the Department of Foreign Affairs, which I would like to read into the record. Senator Norris and other Independent Members might take that into account. The Department states:

Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement of 2002 states that relations between the parties, as well as the provisions of the agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles which guide their internal and international policy, and constitutes an essential element of the agreement. The human rights situation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories are monitored constantly by individual member states, including Ireland, through the representative office in Ramallah, the embassy in Tel Aviv and contacts with a wide range of Israeli and Palestinian rights NGOs and by the Council of Ministers. The relevant Council working group in Brussels, on which all member states are represented, keeps the human rights situation under detailed review. Individual instances are raised directly with Israel by the Presidency of the European Union and the member states. The situation is formally reviewed at the annual meetings of the EU-Israel association committee and at official level in the EU-Israel association council at ministerial level. The next meeting of the association council takes place in Brussels on 16 June.

The Department is saying that a monitoring system does exist and that an important meeting will be held on 16 June. I ask Independent Members who have tabled the motion to leave it on the Order Paper and to review developments in light of that. I am not prepared to accept the motion today or to reorder the Order of Business on foot of that.

Senators Alex White, Leyden, Mullen, Hanafin and Ó Murchú referred to the report of the Human Rights Commissioner. Details of the report demand a debate in this House. While most of its contents concerning the need to improve many aspects of human rights in this country seem to be readily agreed, there are also contentious areas. Members should have the opportunity of discussing them. Whether or not it is possible, as Senator Leyden suggests, to have the commissioner himself present is a matter that could be raised at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Even a standard debate on the contents of the report, however, would be a useful use of the Seanad's time.

Senator Keaveney raised the issue of road safety and the possibility of regulations or legislation insisting that bicycles have lights fitted. It is a very good idea. Perhaps we could also have better enforcement of the law as it applies to the one-eyed cars we see driving around the roads of the country every night. The principle seems to be similar.

Senator Cummins raised the question of the USI lobby and his comments will be forwarded to the Minister, especially those concerning access to councillors. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has indicated his intention to see how the idea of a task force can be proceeded with and he plans to make a statement on the matter in a few months' time.

Senators Mullen, Buttimer and Ormonde referred to overcrowding in prisons. Today's press reports are deeply disturbing as regards Cork Prison which is the most overcrowded prison in the State. Last year, the Government decided to develop a new prison in Kilworth which should alleviate the overcrowding situation, but raises new issues because it is 13 miles from Cork city. Some type of regime would have to be put in place to assist family visits to prisoners.

Senator Hanafin also asked about anti-social behaviour in public places, which tied in with Senator McFadden's request concerning anti-social behaviour in local authority housing estates——