Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Senator Norris to move the motion. The contributions from all Senators are limited to five minutes each.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Seanad Éireann hereby declares that the Order of Business of Seanad Éireann, save in exceptional circumstances, shall take precedence over other business of the Oireachtas and that consequently Senators shall not attend meetings of Committees of the Oireachtas until the Order of Business is concluded in the House.

What has happened in the past has been that the other House was facilitated all the time and arrangements made so that there should be no conflict with important significant business of Dáil Éireann and that is appropriate. They also make arrangements that Ministers who are speaking to committees and Members of the Dáil be allowed to leave to take part in a vote. Often, particularly if a Minister is involved, the operations of the committees are suspended. No such courtesy has been traditionally afforded to the Seanad. I have had to raise the issue on a number of occasions where I have been attending committees. In the past I was a prominent member of two committees which met with considerable regularity and I had a very good track record, as most of my colleagues did. We frequently found that, for example, the Order of Business was at 10.30 a.m. and the committee was scheduled to meet at 10.30 a.m. but if we protested it might be moved to 10 a.m. which made no difference because we had scarcely got through the reading of the minutes and matters arising and even a starting time of 9.30 a.m. was not much use. Other days, such as Mondays and Fridays, were, perhaps understandably, excluded from the rota because they would inconvenience party members who wanted to be in their constituencies.

Another series of matters needs to be examined. The Seanad is required to take a role in these committees. During my parliamentary career the number of committees has increased dramatically and the activities have increased. It is not the fault of the Seanad if, for example, there are not sufficient rooms or appropriate places available for committees - that is a question that should be dealt with by the Oireachtas commission. However, we are required to be there because the committee cannot be quoried without a Member of the Seanad and this can cause difficulties. For many years I have facilitated them and I found I was running from one place to another and back down and not getting either piece of work done properly.

I will take two examples from 2006. The first is 27 June 2006 where Mr. Tom Hyland who played such a significant role and with whom I co-operated, and this House played a very valuable role, in assisting the oppressed people of East Timor. We discussed this in the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Mr. Tom Hyland, who is not only a colleague of mine but a old personal friend whom I had not seen for some time, was making a very important submission and I was asked to speak. The Chairman facilitated me by allowing me to be the first speaker even though I was not part of the party rota. I am grateful for that and most of the time the Chairman and the staff would attempt to facilitate us. It is not individuals who are wrong, it is the system. However, I have to say this. I appreciate the Chairman's graciousness in allowing me to contribute first. I accept that we all have difficulties with regard to speaking on the Order of Business. I am sure the Chairman and committee officials will try to ensure the Seanad is not disadvantaged. I apologised to Mr. Hyland for having to leave to attend the Order of Business before I could hear his reply with which I would catch up in the published report. I had to be discourteous. I did not hear his reply. I did not get an opportunity to return to the committee and to contribute in a dynamic way to that debate which is part of my central political concerns because I felt my first obligation was to the Seanad.

The second example, which is one of many, was on the Order of Business on 3 October 2006. I said:

It is ironic that the House?s consideration of the Road Traffic and Transport Bill 2006 coincides, as I understand it, with a meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport. It is a pity that Members are disadvantaged by not being able to be part of the deliberations of that committee. Meetings of that committee are often scheduled to coincide with the Order of Business in this House. There should be a rebellion ? Senators should make it clear that they will not attend unless this matter is examined and rectified.

Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind the Senator that he has exceeded six minutes.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I beg your pardon. I will finish with one final sentence. I encouraged and incited my colleagues to rebel but they would not.

There was always one quisling who could not wait to rush down to be the good boy or girl who validated the committee. We have the power to put manners on them and increase their respect for us. I wonder if this would be good because, constitutionally, committees cannot meet without us. If we were to hold that gun to their heads, they might treat us with a great deal more respect.

Feargal Quinn (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I second the motion. Senator David Norris was showing off when he said he had been a Member for 25 years. It was my 20th anniversary as a Member last Sunday. I have experience of working on a number of committees, of which one of the most useful was the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service, on which I sat during traumatic times. If some of us are to blame for what went wrong during that time, I have to take responsibility. Senator David Norris is correct that the recognition of what the Houses do has changed because of the work done by committees. I also served on the Joint Committee on European Affairs. Currently, I sit on the Joint Committee for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and convinced my colleagues to meet at 1.30 p.m. every Tuesday rather than 2 p.m. or 2.30 p.m. This meant that when the Minister for Social Protection appeared before the committee earlier for a discussion on tackling the unemployment problem, I had an opportunity to put a number of questions to her. However, I had to wait until she had made her presentation and replied to others before I could put my questions to her, which was not until 3.15 p.m. I could not leave the meeting without asking them. I waited for the replies and then ran to the House to participate on the Order of Business with only seconds to spare. That is a typical example of what happens almost every Tuesday. The reason the committee meets at 1.30 p.m. is to facilitate Senators.

Senator David Norris's point is correct, but I am not sure how we can solve the problem. Perhaps the solution is for the House to meet on Mondays and Fridays also. I hope Seanad reform will take place. Senator Katherine Zappone will introduce a Bill in this regard in the next few weeks and it is hoped we will be able to say a number of changes can be made without holding a referendum. We can do this through legislation rather than amending the Constitution and could earn huge respect for the House. However, if we cannot attend committee meetings and the Order of Business, the onus will be on us to make sure we do something about the matter. Senator David Norris has pinpointed the issue and the solution is in our own hands. If we avoid quislings, we can say we will not allow the committees to meet, unless they do so at a time that enables us to attend the Order of Business in the House. I recognise that somebody could ask why we should miss business other than the Order of Business to attend meetings. However, the Order of Business is crucial in the context of what happens on the day in question, as well as on other days, because the Leader listens attentively and endeavours to bring Ministers to the House to handle the topics raised by Members.

This is a worthy motion. The solution should be in our own hands, but, as Senator David Norris said, the issue is how we handle the issue. We should say to the committee convenors that they have to schedule meetings at a time that enables us to do our primary job in the House and that if they do not do this, we will not attend. Meetings cannot commence until at least one Senator is present. I, therefore, support the motion. Senator David Norris has done the House a great service in tabling it and it is worthy of support.

Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I commend Senators David Norris, Feargal Quinn and Sean D. Barrett for tabling the motion, with which I fully agree. This House has been demeaned by Members raising an item on the Order of Business only to run out of the Chamber immediately to attend a committee meeting. That happens in the case of quite a number of Members, some of whom are courteous enough to apologise to me that they have to attend a committee meeting. It is neither good for the Seanad nor the committee to be disrupted in such a fashion.

Both Houses should reform to allocate one week in four to committees and not have committee meetings when both Houses are doing their business. However, that is not my call and I have no say in the matter. As Senator Feargal Quinn said, if we had the full co-operation of Members, joint committees could not commence without a Senator being present for purposes of having a quorum. The Seanad has to flex its muscles in this regard.

I am fully in favour of the motion. If it is passed today, by the end of the month we should notify the Government Chief Whip and committee Chairmen to allow them to change committee business so as not to hold meetings during the Order of Business in the Seanad. I will suggest committee business not continue between 2.30 p.m. and 4 p.m. on a Tuesday and 10.30 a.m. and midday on a Wednesday and Thursday. This would include committee meetings that begin at 9.30 a.m. and 10 a.m. on a Wednesday and Thursday because it would lead to Senators having to leave to attend the Order of Business.

When there is a vote in the Dáil, the committee sitting is suspended but not when there is a vote in the Seanad. This shows complete disregard for this House. I am certainly open to change, particularly if it would assist the workings of this House and how Members are elected. We have a long battle ahead of us. There will be a referendum on the future of the Seanad. Prior to this, it would be only right and proper for us to outline to the people the changes we envisage in how Members are elected, the number of Members and so on. I am sure this will be included in the Bill that will be introduced and on which we will have a lively debate.

I commend the motion to the House and hope it will be a catalyst for change and help the committee system.

Marie Moloney (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Norris, Quinn and Barrett for bringing forward the motion. Far be it from me to tell Members what to do as I am only here a wet week compared to other Members, but it surprises me that this matter has not been dealt with after 25 years. It is most annoying to watch a Member raise a matter on the Order of Business and not stay on for the reply. At one point, the Leader decided not to respond to those who did not stay on in the Chamber for his reply. I agree with this because whenever I raise a matter on the Order of Business, I make sure I stay for the reply. If I cannot do so, I will not raise the issue I want to raise. Looking around as we discuss this important issue, I note there is a very poor attendance.

I do not want to undermine the work of the committees as they have an important role to play. Recently, a committee was able to reverse the decision to close down the Coast guard stations at Valentia Island and Malin Head. It is most annoying when a committee will suspend a sitting for a Dáil vote but not for a Seanad vote. As well as this, Deputies get to speak first, even if they walk in half an hour into the meeting, while a Senator must wait until the end, even if he or she is the spokesperson on the matter under discussion. I have often waited for my opportunity to contribute at a meeting only for a vote to be called in the Seanad meaning that I miss my turn. The sitting should be suspended when there is a vote in the Seanad. That is the very least that should be done.

The motion will send a message to the committees that Senators have a function and are as every bit important as Deputies. I hope they will take on board the fact that we are now flexing our muscles by giving precedence to the Order of Business in this House over any other business. I again thank the Senators for tabling the motion which we on this side accept. I hope it will reap rewards.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Like Senator Marie Moloney, I am a novice around here. I am surprised that such influential Members as Senators David Norris and Feargal Quinn and the Leader have not been able to crack this issue during the years.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We were waiting for the Senator.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At the first committee meeting I attended I noted it was going to clash with the Order of Business. My first priority is to attend to the business of Seanad Éireann. As a Government Senator, there is an obligation on us to be in the Chamber to ensure the Order of Business is conducted. When committee meetings are being scheduled, why is it not ensured that they will not clash with the Order of Business? All Senators want to contribute constructively as they can to committees. We also want to ensure we do not neglect the business of Seanad Éireann to which we have been elected.

I support the motion tabled by Senators David Norris and Feargal Quinn. I have sympathy for those trying to order the business of the Oireachtas. There are so many committees engaged in much activity. The fact that the Houses of the Oireachtas sits three days each week means much of the business has to be crammed into those three days. Seanad Éireann is regarded as a second-class Chamber.

As previous speakers have said, rightly, when there is a vote in Dáil Éireann the committees are suspended. Everyone goes to vote and business recommences when it is over, but a similar provision is not in place when there is a vote in Seanad Éireann and that is not correct.

I support the call by Senator Norris and Senator Quinn for the Oireachtas to examine how committees are organised and to ensure that there is no clash with the Order of Business. I am also a member of the particular committee referred to by Senator Quinn. In addition, we have our Senators meeting at 1.30 p.m. on a Tuesday and this causes another difficulty for myself as a member of that committee. I would prefer an arrangement - I imagine it is quite possible - whereby in several weeks time Members will be able to attend the Order of Business and participate fully in the committees to which they have been nominated. We are simply asking for a little fair play and consideration and I believe it is possible to do this if the will is there. I call on the Chief Whip and everyone else involved to ensure that Members can be facilitated to serve on committees to their full capacity.

Colm Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness, the committees have made a valuable contribution to debate. The Leader has suggested holding committees on one week in the month and this is something we should seriously consider. The best evidence for this was when we sat for three days in the Joint Committee on Health and Children to discuss the A, B and C v. Ireland and the X cases. The reason it got such public interest was that we were not competing for media time with either Seanad or Dáil Éireann. I was amazed at the number of people who tuned into those three days of debate and, in fairness, the three days were used effectively to get information to the public. A lot of information is available at committee meetings but it is not getting out to the public because we are competing for media space with the debates in the Dáil and Seanad at the same time. This is something we should consider when we are looking at the whole structure in future.

In the European Parliament there is one hour in the day for voting between 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. and each vote takes 30 seconds. I have made this argument previously. In a short period they can go through anything up to 200 votes. This is something we should consider as part of any reform. It is relevant not only for this issue but for other issues as well with regard to how we can make more use of the time we have. Things are moving a good deal faster now than they did 25, 30 or 40 years ago and we need to move with the times and deal with how we use our time.

One thing we should consider is how we vote because when the bells for voting go every 15 or 20 minutes-----

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think I could survive 200 votes per minute. The g-forces would be too much for me. I am far too elderly. It is unconscionable to move at 200 mph.

Colm Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is something we should at least consider when we are discussing overall reform. I agree there is no point as it stands. The Order of Business is held for one hour between 2.30 p.m. and 3.30 p.m. on a Tuesday and for one an hour between 10.30 a.m. and 11.30 a.m. on Wednesday and Thursday mornings. Those three hours should be preserved for the Order of Business. Committees should not be held at these times and we should not be competing with these times. It is something to consider. I also believe the Leader's proposal should be considered at this stage as well.

Sean Barrett (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with everything that has been said by everyone heretofore. I understood this was the position before because when I was here first the usher told me at a committee meeting that the Senate had gone into session. I was more or less told to come up to the Chamber and I was delighted to do so. The House should have precedence over committees because it deals with vital national issues. The committees operate well but on a departmental or sectoral basis. We should be here and I agree with the remarks of the Leader, Senator Colm Burke and everyone on the other side of the House, although I do not think of them as being on the other side. The House operates as a very good debating chamber and it should not be overshadowed by committees. I imagine the Chairs will agree when this class of fixtures is presented to them. I commend Senator Norris and Senator Quinn on proposing the motion.

Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All Senators who have indicated have spoken.

David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Let the record show there is unanimous agreement for the motion.

Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is cross-party agreement.

Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When is it proposed to sit again?

Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ar 10.30 a.m. maidin amárach.