David Norris (Independent)

I endorse the comments made by other Members that we are being made totally irrelevant by the chaotic management of business and the rushing through of legislation. I have just been listening to one of our distinguished colleagues, the only one of our group who did not speak on the Defamation Bill, doing an extremely good job on Pat Kenny. That shows that the radio is much more relevant than this House. That is thanks to the disgraceful way in which the business is being organised.

Senator O'Toole and I have been discussing the matter and we would like to propose a motion. I understand that my colleague, Senator Quinn, will second it. It is that we should discuss as the first item today the rushing of legislation through this House and the implications of that procedure. We have seen the report from the Irish Human Rights Commission that points out, for example, that the Bill cannot become operational until October, yet the other House has guillotined it and, as Senator Alex White indicated and I pointed out earlier in the week, we cannot realistically expect to get any amendments passed. The Irish Human Rights Commission has offered to human rights-proof the legislation but the Government has completely snubbed that offer.

Senator O'Toole is 100% correct, that this is all of a piece with the mean-minded attempts to dismantle every organisation that articulates the needs of the poor. I have been saying that for a very long time. We have just had the last ever independent report of the Combat Poverty Agency. If one reads between the lines and articles by the agency's previous chief executives, one will realise how dangerous is the situation. In these circumstances, if one does not allow a safety valve for people who are being pressurised by the economic climate, and if one instead screws the lid down so that they cannot get expression for those views, one is creating a volatile and dangerous situation.

The legislation that was passed yesterday was very important. It is a pity we did not have even more extensive discussion on it in the light of developments that have taken place since that Bill was first discussed in the House. I refer to the quite extraordinary situation in England where the Murdoch press has been exposed for buying the work of telephone tappers, for inciting criminal action against the private rights of citizens. That was done with the collaboration of the police and other elements in society that should know better. I look forward to the privacy Bill because there must be balance. We must have a privacy Bill if the press is to be protected or over-protected. Look at how utterly ineffective the British Press Council was in this matter.