Seanad debates

Thursday, 29 January 2009

10:30 am

Photo of Joe O'TooleJoe O'Toole (Independent)

It would be useful if this House held a debate on the Eames-Bradley report, which forces us to confront certain issues. It is easy to understand why it was met with an extraordinary degree of emotion in the North. However, being able to understand the reaction of all the parties concerned does not necessarily mean one would agree with them. It behoves us to examine the report and to determine our views on it. If somebody dies, his or her family probably suffers the same sense of loss regardless of whether he or she was Ireland's worst terrorist or most innocent victim or an upholder of law and order. That has to be considered. It is not a question of equating one with the other. I do not want to debate the issues now but the point I want to make is that we would be forced to address issues we have not previously raised in terms of how the community and family lives have been affected.

Wearing my hat as chair of the North-South co-operation Ireland group in Leinster House, which recently visited a number of places in the North and held a meeting with the North-South Ministerial Council, I became aware for the first time of certain issues. Senator Boyle, who was also part of the group, can confirm that the work of the North-South Ministerial Council continues between meetings even though we hear nothing about this. We regularly ask what is happening in regard to the Good Friday Agreement but Ministers and junior ministers meet weekly or fortnightly on various issues. At the end of each meeting, the Northern Minister reports to the Northern Ireland Assembly. It would be useful if that practice were followed here. The Seanad would be an appropriate forum to discuss reports of ministerial meetings and I ask the Leader to consider my suggestion and raise it with the Department of the Taoiseach or the Department of Foreign Affairs, both of which deal with these matters.

Senator Fitzgerald is correct about the current round of social partnership talks. As one with many years of experience in social partnership, I can see the matter from both sides. I can see how these Houses are being excluded from discussions. We need to consider the matter very carefully because it should not be a question of our being part of the negotiations or of democracy being undermined in Government Buildings. I concur with Senator Fitzgerald that we can have it both ways. The public sector unions are meeting at present with their employer, that is, the Government, and the private sector unions are meeting with representatives of their employers, IBEC and others. It is the only place discussions of this nature can take place but, in terms of keeping people up to date, this should be done by reporting to the Houses. That is the missing element from the effort to ensure everyone gets behind the process. I would like to receive a report in this House. We are not going to read the details in The Irish Times because a basic rule of negotiation is that nothing is agreed publicly before it is agreed in private. I did not even read the report in today's edition of The Irish Times because I know there is nothing in it. If I was in charge of negotiations I would ensure that such reports contained only the vaguest of details. That does not mean, however, that responsible Members of the Opposition should not be informed and that is where we are lacking at present.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.