Seanad debates
Thursday, 27 October 2005
Order of Business.
10:30 am
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Order of Business is No. 1, Air Navigation (Eurocontrol) Bill 2005 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage, to be taken on the conclusion of the Order of Business and to conclude not later than 1 p.m. — spokespersons have 12 minutes each and other Senators have eight minutes, with the Minister to be called on to reply not later than five minutes before the conclusion of Second Stage; and No. 2, Prisons Bill 2005 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage, to be taken at 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. — spokespersons have 15 minutes each and other Senators have ten minutes, with the Minister to be called on to reply not later than ten minutes before the conclusion of Second Stage. There will be a sos from 1 p.m. until 2 p.m.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will refer to the other matter later. All of us on this side of the House wish to congratulate Senator Cox on the mini-revolt she led last night.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is not a matter for the Order of Business.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not see the Senator here this morning but I wonder whether she will appear behind me at any minute.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yesterday's business cannot be discussed on today's Order of Business.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I suspect it is very much current business. Now that Fianna Fáil has broken ranks with a Progressive Democrats Minister, I wonder whether the reverse applies. I rather hope that it does.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This week, Senators Norris and Quinn raised the issue of 1916 and the announcement made at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis by the Taoiseach last weekend. I assumed all party leaders were consulted and cleared this matter in advance of the Taoiseach's speech but I was informed yesterday that this had not happened. Two serious points stem from this decision. First, it was inappropriate to make an announcement on a national day of commemoration at what was a political rally. Second, there is a serious issue concerning the role of the Army. I would have preferred if a decision had been made in consultation with all of the party leaders. Where we commit the Army to a national day of commemoration, it should not be used in a partisan party political way by one party in attempting to show its neo-national credentials against another. It is a serious matter in terms of respect for the Army. I ask that future decisions of this nature be taken with all party leaders in both Houses.
I do not for one moment reject the fact that the 1916 Rising was an important staging post towards Irish independence. However, many other events have not been commemorated such as the establishment of the Irish Free State and the Irish Republic, both of which had democratic legitimacy. The Government should not use the Army as a pawn. We must reconsider this issue and the way in which we commemorate our history in an all-party way.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I agree with Senator Brian Hayes. The notion of a 1916 commemorative military parade was launched at a party rally. That is regrettable because it makes it the possession of one section rather than the entire community. Children will enjoy it as a day out. However, I remember the nasty exclusive sabre-rattling that occurred in 1966. As somebody who claims the right to be an Irishman just like everybody else, it did not make me comfortable. I will state again what I stated last week, that to me Easter Sunday is about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, not the insurrection of Padraig Pearse.
I will make a couple of positive points. I have just come from the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport which had a meeting with the Railway Procurement Agency and other bodies. The implementation of a proposal for a metro system in Dublin received unanimous support. We urged the Cabinet, in light of its ten year transport infrastructure plans, to include it. We also referred to the study commissioned by professional consultants which strongly recommends a metro system for the capital that would not only connect the city to the airport, but also onwards to Swords. Everybody is on board. It is appropriate that we discuss the issue in this House because of the significant role played by the Leader of the House when Minister for Transport. She had more guts than her two male predecessors in examining the proposal for a metro system logically and clearly, and in not having a closed mind. In those circumstances it would be right for this Chamber to discuss the issue. I hope the Leader agrees with me and that the strongest possible message that we need a metro system will be sent from this House to the Cabinet. I will not be negative about Luas. However, it was an expensive bauble which had no impact on traffic levels. It made people comfortable.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It had no impact whatsoever, statistically.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is nice for the people who live along it but let us have the real solution at last.
As I am in positive mode, we should congratulate Mr. Niall Mellon who was in the House recently——
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is not in order as it would set a precedent.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like the Leader to give as much support as possible, through the appropriate Ministers, to the wonderful work done by Mr. Mellon in building houses in South Africa and taking decent Irish builders out to——
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We cannot set a precedent for such requests.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It would happen on the Order of Business every day if they were allowed.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was merely asking the Leader to be positive and speak to the Ministers involved and give encouragement.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I assume the rules of this House are applied in the same way to everybody who speaks here and that we will be left with no uncertainty about this in the future.
I ask the Leader for a debate on workers' protection legislation for a number of reasons, including the apparent stalemate on whether we will have a further partnership agreement. While this stalemate crystalised around one issue, it developed from the frustration of the trade union movement at the inertia of the Government on issues such as the expansion of the industrial inspectorate. It was agreed it would be expanded dramatically. However, the expansion has not been fully completed. A group of Polish workers made serious allegations about being grossly underpaid. Six months later the inspectors had still not begun their investigations. They stated they did not have the numbers. Unfortunately, one of this country's characteristics is that we are far better at introducing new legislation than enforcing it. This week five people died in industrial accidents. The two issues concern the environment in which people work. Everybody accepts employees must operate safely. However, it is ultimately an employer's responsibility to provide a safe working environment. We must examine all of the legislation in place. The Minister should come in to the House to discuss all of these issues and how we can provide people with a proper, safe and non-exploitative work environment.
We need a debate on the Ferns report. A Minister should come to the House and respond to it. I do not want to blame the Government. This is not a matter on which I wish to create a political conflict. However, we must discuss some of the issues involved. The Roman Catholic Church has discussed at length the framework document which is supposed to create guidelines. Nobody told me the church had submitted the framework to Rome nine years ago. I did not know this until I saw the report. It is in the gift of the authorities in Rome to make the framework obligatory under Canon Law but nine years on it has still not done so. Only the Vatican can compel a bishop to implement the framework. I find it extraordinary that after nine of the most traumatic years in the history of the Catholic Church, the authorities in Rome are still shy in insisting that every bishop in Ireland operates according to best practice. We should not discuss the failures of the State. We should discuss the degree to which a large institution within the State seems unwilling to take what everybody else now knows to be the right action.
John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As one who is not a member of the political party which held a so-called rally in Killarney at the weekend, I defend the right of the Taoiseach to make an announcement there or anywhere else on the issue of a 1916 Rising commemoration. I live near the Curragh and it is interesting to note that the barracks there are named after the leaders of the 1916 rebellion such as Ceannt and Pearse. It is standard practice in a democracy to have military involvement in commemorations and State ceremonies. It is not unusual. In our case, we have Óglaigh na hÉireann. Many would be willing to hold overt military parades to mark the anniversary of the rising. For that and other reasons, it is entirely appropriate that the Army which is the inheritor of the 1916 tradition and underpins our democracy be present at any State occasion commemorating the event.
Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On that subject, I support the comments of Senator Brian Hayes. While no one is against the idea — personally I am in favour of it — our great republican democracy would be better served if there was consultation. We are anxious to ensure the participation of all parties. This could become — properly so — a great national day, to which I look forward. I encourage the Leader and the Taoiseach to consult, as Senator Hayes said, with all party leaders because every right thinking citizen is anxious to honour the memory of those involved in 1916 and our history.
In view of the importance of child care and how strongly Members on both sides feel about it, I encourage the Leader who will be anxious to oblige to arrange a further early debate on the issue as many did not have an opportunity to speak yesterday.
I asked previously about the defeated stage payments Bill and referred to the promise made by the then Minister of State, Deputy Noel Ahern, that the Government would introduce its own measure. As it is not included in the proposed legislative programme, I am anxious to hear if the Leader knows anything about it and what is being proposed, about which I heard a rumour.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator was not at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis in Killarney.
Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I was but I do not know where the Leader was.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The matter of Killarney is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is right and fitting that we commemorate the rising of 1916. In Killarney the Taoiseach said it was not triumphalist, but a matter of recognising the sacrifice, valour and humanity of those who fought in the rising which was a watershed on the road to independence. As I recall, in 1966 there was a whole year of commemorations of sports, cultural and literary activities. The Taoiseach made the point in Killarney that the commemoration would not be confined to one day. He also said the Government would set up a national committee to oversee the commemoration. This will rightly ensure the consultation to which Senator Brian Hayes referred. I hope there will be no division. The Seanad can play a role in this respect; it is a time for unity.
It is right that the Army should participate. As has been said, it is the inheritor in respect of the sacrifice made by the great people concerned. The people also want this. I had never seen such an outpouring of emotion as at the State funerals for the forgotten ten volunteers, in spite of adverse advance criticism.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator is looking into his own heart.
Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Taoiseach is acting in the best interests of the people. I appeal to everyone in this Chamber and throughout the country to unite in this commemoration.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not disagree with anything said in the House about the 1916 Rising. Nobody has a problem with celebrating or commemorating it. As Senator Brian Hayes said, it is a "staging post" in our history which should be recognised but there is a problem with the Taoiseach announcing it at a tribal rally.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Ross could have chosen better words.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The House is becoming very prim these days.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The House must respect all political parties.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The words stand. It is clear that in this House it has already become a political football. Political parties should not compete for possession of this part of our history. That is the problem.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If we are genuine about it being a national commemorative event — I believe Senator Ó Murchú is genuine — let us not allow Sinn Féin and Fianna Fáil to compete for possession of this part of our history, as occurred last weekend.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the Taoiseach was genuine, he would have announced it in the Dáil, not at that event which the Cathaoirleach does not want me to call a tribal rally.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I make a special plea to the Leader of the House——
Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I might have to defend the Killarney structures yet.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What happened in Killarney is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
——that the Fianna Fáil Party, in a spirit of consensus and mercy, has compassion on Senator Cox when it comes to consider her case.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is not relevant to the Order of Business. That is not a matter for this House but for the Fianna Fáil Party, of which Senator Ross is not a member.
Shane Ross (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Startling figures showing our high rate of personal credit, consumption and borrowing were issued yesterday by a company of stockbrokers owned by a bank. The ratio of personal debt to average income will rise from 120% to 160% in the next three years and we are now rated third highest in the euro zone. It is a source of alarm to international observers and the Central Bank that individuals are borrowing so much money for personal consumption. The main problem is the banks' lending for mortgages and credit cards. As the Central Bank will issue a statement next week, I ask that we debate this matter at an early date.
Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Leader favours a further splurge.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In light of the comments made on the weekend's announcement, it is sad that there is division on what should be a great national celebration. The Taoiseach is entitled to make public announcements wherever he sees fit; there is a precedent. It is ironic that last weekend our neighbours in Great Britain celebrated a military event of 200 years ago, the Battle of Trafalgar, in which Lord Nelson who passed away in that battle defeated the French and the Spanish. Nobody suggested there was an element of triumphalism about it. It is part of the fabric of its history and traditions.
Brendan Ryan (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was not announced at the British Labour Party conference.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Anybody who has observed the British penchant for commemoration will know that, in common with other large powers, militarism forms a great part. This is more about pique on the part of those who feel they were not consulted. In a spirit of reconciliation, solidarity and empathy with all shades of opinion on this island and in this House, will the Leader consider holding a debate early in the new year on the 90th anniversary of the 1916 Rising?
11:00 am
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That would allow all sides of the House to join in supporting this great national celebration.
In news that broke overnight the democratically elected President of Iran was quoted last night as saying he believed the state of Israel should be wiped off the map. Irrespective of one's views about Israeli foreign policy and its policy towards the Palestinians, and I believe most Members of this House support the Palestinian cause, I support the right of the people of Israel to exist.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In that context the international outcry against the Iranian President is such that I have some faith in international morality. I ask the Leader to request the Minister for Foreign Affairs to make a statement at the earliest opportunity on Ireland's response to this unacceptable and outrageous attack on another country which is, although it is sometimes forgotten, a democratic country. The President of Iran went way over the mark in making that statement. I ask that there be an early statement in response.
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What is the situation with Seanad reform?
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator will have to speak to Senator Brian Hayes.
Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I seek a debate on that issue. It was suggested previously that Senators should be enabled to put down parliamentary questions to Ministers. Recently, I put down a parliamentary question through a Deputy, as that is the only way we can do it, about a health issue in my constituency. The reply was that it was not a matter for the Minister for Health and Children but that the new parliamentary queries division in the HSE would answer the question. If that is the way we intend to proceed, we should impose timeframes on the HSE for replies to questions. We should not have to wait two or three weeks for a reply from the HSE when the reply should come from the Minister's office. Why was that parliamentary queries division, if that is the correct name for it, not put in the Minister's office instead of the HSE? It is time to examine these issues.
Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The 1916 Rising marks the foundation of the State and the Proclamation is its founding charter. There is no question of it being a party occasion.
Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a national occasion. I will not repeat arguments already made on this side of the House. I also strongly endorse Senator Mooney's comments about the intolerable statement by the President of Iran. The Minister for Foreign Affairs should protest against what is an invitation to genocide and terrorism of every kind. Many of us have been critical of Israeli foreign policy. We have also been critical in this House of President Bush's foreign policy. However, we must be realistic. A clear message must be sent by the community of nations, including Ireland, that this type of statement is simply not acceptable. It is also an illustration of the dangers of theocratic government anywhere in the world.
Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I support the sentiments expressed by Senator Brian Hayes. Nobody doubts that the anniversary in 2016 will be a significant historical event. The manner in which the announcement was made and the lack of all-party consultation are the real issues. I speak as a member of the only political party that existed in 1916. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael did not exist then. The Army is the Army of the State, not the Army of Government. The fact that the announcement was made in the wigwam in Killarney when the Taoiseach was putting on his warpaint——
Michael McCarthy (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That make up costs the State a great deal of money.
John Gerard Hanafin (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I support Senator Mooney and Senator Mansergh. The world is a more dangerous place today. The President of Iran speaking of Israel in those terms and given our knowledge that Iran is pursuing a nuclear programme, there is a strong probability that Israel will defend its interests prior to any other eventuality. The situation is very serious.
Will the Leader arrange a debate on transport? A number of people objected vociferously to taxpayers' money being used to provide a new terminal at Dublin Airport. However, it appears that at least one company is using taxpayers' money for its bottom line. If a company raises taxes, it does so on behalf of the State and it is incumbent on that company to pass that money to the State. There is no basis for telling people that because they paid money to the company, it will not return it. That is the pirate's charter — take everything and give nothing back. It is unacceptable. If landing fees and taxes have been paid but the people do not fly, the money either belongs to the people concerned or the taxpayer, not the company.
Having read the Ferns report, it is apparent that we must legislate to protect children. People have not acted properly.
Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Last week, I put down a matter for discussion on the Adjournment but, due to time constraints and the significant number of other matters on the agenda, the Cathaoirleach was unable to facilitate it. The motion I put down called on the Government to assemble an all-party committee to begin preparations for an inclusive celebration of the 1916 Rising. It is important that we commemorate 1916 in an appropriate, inclusive fashion. It is a fact of history that 1916 occurred and it will be commemorated 11 short years hence. It will be a great occasion for the Irish people and we must ensure that it is a celebration in which everybody can participate and feel welcome.
All-party involvement in organising that commemoration is the most appropriate approach. The majority of people involved in politics today, both in Government and in Opposition, will not be the players in 2016 when there will be a new generation of politicians. However, we must set the tone now by ensuring that in 11 years there will be an appropriate recognition of the men and women of 1916.
The other issue I wish to raise arises from Senator Ryan's comments on social partnership. The continuation of social partnership is now being debated by the trade union movement and, obviously, different opinions will be voiced. It has occasionally been said in this House that the major economic and social decisions are taken outside the House and that parliamentarians, apart from Government Ministers, are no longer playing a significant role in that regard. It is important that this House has a debate on social partnership. All Members agree it has played a major role in turning our economic performance round.
Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the trade unions and employers can discuss the future of social partnership, so can politicians. I ask the Leader to arrange a debate in the Seanad on the merits of social partnership, how it can be driven forward and how we can ensure it continues to play a role in developing and strengthening the economy.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Brian Hayes brought up a matter about last night but the Cathaoirleach ruled it out of order. The Senator then raised the issue of 1916 again in the House and said the Army should not be used in a party political manner. There was a discussion about this on Tuesday and we strongly made the point that the Army is provided for in the Constitution. I do not recall it but I am aware that Mr. Costello went to Canada and announced an Irish Republic. One can talk about consultation with others but he was inCanada when he announced it.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It had far reaching implications that are still with us today.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Leader to reply without interruptions.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Unlike the Leader, I do not remember that.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Order, the Leader to reply without interruption.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I spoke quite clearly. Senator Hayes thinks he is frightfully funny. He is not a bit funny; he is an ass. At least, that is the kind——
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If that is not calling the kettle black I do not know what is, but I will not take that.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I apologise and withdraw the remark.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will not run to anyone to take it off the record; it is on the record and will stay on the record.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I note Senator O'Rourke's fulsome apology.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do apologise but I am not going to beat myself on the ground.
Rory Kiely (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Leader, without interruption, on the Order of Business.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will speak to Senator Hayes again about his remarks.
Senator Norris agreed with Senator Brian Hayes on the proposed 1916 commemoration. Senator Norris was the first to raise it in this House on Tuesday. He asked us to give full robust support to the metro idea and we will be glad to do so. He then decried the Luas but he should stop people coming off the Luas and ask them whether they enjoy using it; they love it.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Absolutely, but it has no effect on the traffic.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Ryan spoke of the stalemate on social partnership and sought a debate on legislation referring to worker exploitation, immigrant workers, health and safety and all worker related issues. That is what the head of SIPTU is worried about and would like to see debated. Perhaps it would be a good idea. He also correctly stated the guidelines have not been given the Vatican imprimatur and that is stated in the report.
Senator Dardis stoutly defended the Taoiseach's right to make a statement — I would agree fully with him that it was a highly appropriate statement.
Senator Coghlan, whom I am glad to see but who never came near me in Killarney,——
Paul Coghlan (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We must have been mixing in different wigwams.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Coghlan was not in mine anyway.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I asked about Senator Coghlan's whereabouts in the hotel.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Coghlan supported Senator Hayes and called for another debate on child care — we have had enough of them. He also asked the position on his Housing (Stage Payments) Bill 2004 and I will inquire about it.
Senator Ó Murchú also spoke about the proposed commemoration of 1916, that we commemorate the valour and the courage of those who fought in 1916 and agreed with Army participation.
Senator Ross agreed with the sentiments expressed on all sides in this House about commemorating 1916 but I gathered he thought it was announced in the wrong milieu. We think otherwise. He then raised the increase in personal debt per capita in Ireland to 160% and sought a debate on the matter.
Senator Mooney thought that it was out of a sense of pique that this debate about 1916 was being carried on by some people in the House. He then raised the statement about wiping out Israel, which we are told was made by the Iranian President, and asked that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, make a strong statement about it.
Senator Terry asked the position on Seanad reform. We have had our meeting with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, and the next one is scheduled. She put it against the background of questions to Ministers, which, as she will be aware, would require a constitutional referendum. If one reads the Constitution, Ministers are not accountable to the Seanad; they are to the Dáil. They come here when requested. I find the Adjournment debate, where one can get answers, is good. Introducing a process of questions to Ministers would require a constitutional amendment.
Senator Mansergh also spoke of commemorating 1916 and the intolerable statement by the President of Iran.
I agree with Senator McCarthy that the Labour Party is the oldest political party in Ireland and that is well recognised. He stated that the lack of all-party consultation was one of the real issues. Deputy Bertie Ahern is the Taoiseach of the country and he is the president of my party. He chose the occasion, therefore, to make that statement.
I did not understand Senator Hanafin's point. Maybe I was not listening sufficiently closely. He raised the need for legislation on child abuse and he is correct. He raised another matter, which I could not follow. As this is my fault not his, I will speak to him afterwards about it.
I did not know Senator Bradford tabled an Adjournment debate last week but he was prescient.
Paddy BurkeMary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Senator Bradford called for a debate on social partnership. It would be a good idea to debate social partnership. This follows on from the debate sought by Senator Ryan on all of the legislation which affects workers and workers' rights. We will see if we can do something on that. By chance, I happened to hear Mr. David Begg on the radio yesterday. He cited one of the measures in Seanad reform which related to scrutiny of social partnership and he was in admiration of it. We will see about organising a debate. I do not know who would take it — the Minister for Finance, I suppose.
Mary O'Rourke (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No, the Taoiseach has twice been into this wigwam.