David Norris (Independent)

I welcome the statement from President Obama that he supports gay marriage. It is a significant move that the most powerful political leader in the world has endorsed that. It is pleasing to note we have at least one leader who has a prophetic vision and is prepared to take a risk. I was a little worried about President Obama but he has restored my faith. I hope my faith will also be restored by the synod of the Anglican communion which will meet shortly. It includes very conservative elements, as do the other churches, who seem to be making a move in their usual, behind-the-scenes manner. I encourage the brave group which is changing attitudes in the church. At least we, in the Anglican church, are having a debate, which is great. While this may not be a problem of homophobia, there is certainly a widespread practice of ignoring issues. I was ashamed to find when I raised the issue of 12 teenage boys who were castrated in a Catholic home in the Netherlands in the 1950s that no one other than Senator Cummins followed up on the issue. We would have heard a great deal about it if it had involved female genital mutilation. Why are we still despised in this manner?

I would like to be positive and state it was wonderful to hear a Deputy discuss the fiscal treaty with Pat Kenny. I use the term "pig in the poke treaty" to describe it because we are buying a pig in a poke. If it keeps changing, it will probably turn out to be Joyce's old sow which eats her own farrow. We simply do not know what we are voting on. When I made a similar comment in the House some months ago it was not picked up by any journalist. Things are picked up only when said in the other House. Perhaps Deputies are listening to us. Would it not be refreshing if the Dáil were listening to the Seanad? In that case, we could at least speak to the Dáil. This recalls the saying about the famous Lodges who spoke only to the Cabots who spoke only to God. If Senators speak to the Dáil, it will speak to the media for us.

I ask the Leader to reopen the nonsensical decision whereby it is purported to forbid the sharing of time on Second Stage. From where did this decision come? It landed on my desk without explanation. As the Government parties know perfectly well, it is totally undemocratic. The first thing the Government side did after making this rule was to break it, using the excuse that two Ministers were in attendance. That scenario is not covered in any of the documentation I saw. The Government used a fudge to get its own way. I insist that this matter be reopened. Let us have real democracy and allow Members to share time. The House rule its own business and inform the decisions of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.