Seanad Éireann

Vol. 200 Wednesday, No. 13 17 February 2010

DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SEANAD ÉIREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Wednesday, 17 February 2010.

Business of Seanad ………………………………723 Order of Business …………………………………724 Cancer Awareness: Statements ……………………………742 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Order for Second Stage ……………………………759 Second Stage …………………………………759 Business of Seanad ………………………………779 Power sharing agreement in Northern Ireland: Motion ……………………779 Adjournment Matters: Scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge …………………………810 Archaeological Sites ………………………………813 Special Educational Needs ……………………………815 SEANAD ÉIREANN

————

Dé Céadaoin, 17 Feabhra 2010. Wednesday, 17 February 2010.

————

Chuaigh an Cathaoirleach i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.

————

Paidir. Prayer.

————

Business of Seanad. An Cathaoirleach: I have received notice from Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill that, on the motion for the Adjournment of the House today, he proposes to raise the following matter:

Chun eolas a lorg an tAire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta faoi na pleananna atá aige do scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge do 2010.

I have also received notice from Senator Ciarán Cannon of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to indicate the reason an application dated 25 September 2007 to carry out works at Lorro Gate, Athenry, County Galway has not been responded to.

I have also received notice from Senator Pearse Doherty of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Education and Science to ensure no child with special educational needs will be left without support from a special needs assistant.

I have also received notice from Senator Fidelma Healy Eames of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Health and Children to clarify, in respect of diagnostic laboratory services, her comments in Dáil Éireann on 8 December 2009 with respect to clinical laboratory services in the Health Services Executive.

I have also received notice from Senator Cecilia Keaveney of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to outline the reason moneys are not available this year to progress works at Greencastle Harbour causing them to cease, leaving a potentially dangerous situation.

I have also received notice from Senator Jerry Buttimer of the following matter:

The need for the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism to make a statement on the future role of Fáilte Ireland training centres in providing training courses for people who are unemployed in Cork, Dublin and Waterford and to make reference to the 2007 to 2009 figures.

I regard the matters raised as suitable for discussion on the Adjournment. I have selected the matters raised by Senators Ó Domhnaill, Cannon and Doherty and they will be taken at the 723 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

[An Cathaoirleach.] conclusion of business. The other Senators may give notice on another day of the matters they wish to raise.

Order of Business. Senator Donie Cassidy: The Order of Business is No. 1, statements on cancer awareness, to be taken at the conclusion of the Order of Business and conclude not later than 1.30 p.m., on which spokespersons may speak for ten minutes and all other Senators for seven minutes and Senators may share time, by agreement of the House, with the Minister to be called upon ten minutes from the conclusion of the debate for closing comments and to take questions from leaders or spokespersons; No. 2, Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010 — Order for Second Stage and Second Stage, to be taken at 2.30 p.m., on which spokespersons may speak for 12 minutes and all other Senators for seven minutes and Senators may share time, by agreement of the House; and No. 37, Private Members’ motion No. 19 re the recent power-sharing agreement in Northern Ireland, to be taken at 5 p.m. and conclude not later than 7.30 p.m. No. 2, Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010, shall resume at the conclusion of No. 37, if not previously concluded. There will be a sos from 1.30 p.m. to 2.30 p.m.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: Today is the first day of Lent. The statement from the Vatican yesterday is a sorry start to this religious season. It is very disappointing for the victims of abuse that their main concerns were not dealt with at the meeting in the Vatican. It is very clear that pomp and circumstance are not what they want; they want a real response to the issues they raised. They are particularly disappointed that the question of a cover-up has not been dealt with in the discussions so far. I hope it will be dealt with later and that they will feel satisfied.

Senator Terry Leyden: That is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: I ask the Minister——

Senator David Norris: We have a Cathaoirleach and it is not Senator Leyden.

An Cathaoirleach: No interruptions, please.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: It is extremely important——

An Cathaoirleach: The Leader of the Opposition is speaking and I want no interruptions from the Government side of the House.

Senator Terry Leyden: Mea culpa.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: It is critical that the House have the opportunity to consider the plan brought forward by the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Barry Andrews, and that we have ongoing debate on its implementation. The political system must be seen to respond effectively and in an ongoing manner to the issues raised. We need further discussion on the budget for the implementation plan. I want to return to a topic and key concern that I raised yesterday, namely, job creation. Over 400,000 people are unemployed. I want to return, in particular, to the issue of jobs in SR Technics and the discussions with Ryanair. There has been much comment recently to the effect that Ryanair has a hidden agenda. Its agenda has never really been hidden; it is about profit. It has been very clear and there has never been any mistake about it. Given the unemployment rate, these are extraordinary times. I hope the Government, especially the Tánaiste, 724 Order of 17 February 2010. Business and Ryanair will ensure the retention of jobs. The representatives at the meeting yesterday had a 51% stake in Aer Lingus. Irrespective of whether it is a question of a lease or discussions thereon, whether hangar 6 is not being used or whether the lease was only renegotiated last year, if there is scope, surely the Government, especially the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach, should be moving mountains to ensure the 300 jobs can be kept in this country rather than moved to another. If one thinks about the personal cost to those involved and their families, not to speak of the cost to the State of unemployment, surely every effort should be made in the coming days to save these jobs. I propose an amendment to the Order of Business that the Tánaiste come to the House to discuss the Government’s job creation plan. It is not just a question of the 300 jobs in SR Technics but of the job creation plan throughout the State and the role of FÁS. I meet people every week who have been offered courses by FÁS that are not suited to their needs. Some days agao I met a construction worker who had been offered a receptionist course. I am not saying what is appropriate or inappropriate for a particular person in his or her own circumstances but surely we should be discussing the macro approach to job creation in the House today.

Senator Joe O’Toole: It is the role of this House to ensure children are protected from abuse and other threats. Whether bishops resign is not our business, nor do I care, but it is our business to recognise that bishops are patrons and managers of schools and making rules for them. They are doing so without any form of vetting or clearance. They can sack teachers if they believe their lifestyle is in conflict with the ethos of a school.

Senator David Norris: Hear, hear.

Senator Joe O’Toole: At the same time, they can protect abusers and thereby undermine their own Christian ethos and be completely safe. Irrespective of whether one is a bishop or a lay person, one should be properly vetted and be regarded as safe to be in charge of a school. There is an inherent conflict between the bishop as line manger of a priest against whom a complaint is made and the bishop as champion of the victim who suffers. The current circumstances must not be allowed to continue. It is not a question of how the bishops get on in Rome but of how they run their schools in Ireland, their influence and authority. We need to deal with this issue very clearly. That is the issue for me. The Catholic Church can make decisions on who runs its dioceses but I want to know how our children in our schools are being protected. I have another comment on the same issue. The spectre of Archbishop John Charles McQuaid hangs over the report of the Joint Committee on the Constitutional Amendment on Children. In approximately 1935, 1936 and 1937, when the Constitution was being drafted, it was established that Article 42 would deal with the question of education. It required and allowed that parents would have responsibility “for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children”. That is fair enough but when it came to determining standards in circumstances where the State had to take control following the failure of parents to take responsibility, it was included in the Constitution that, “The State shall, however, as guardian of the common good, require in view of actual conditions that the children receive a certain minimum education, moral, intellectual and social”. Mr. Éamon de Valera wanted physical education to be added to this. However, Archbishop John Charles McQuaid intervened by letter and Mr. de Valera backed off, the reason being that the archbishop believed physical education could lead to people telling women in schools how their bodies worked or to the protection of children through sex education. Archbishop McQuaid was not ready to allow that to happen. I looked forward to the report of the Joint Committee on the Consti- tutional Amendment on Children in the hope this matter at least would be dealt with, only to see, to my horror, that Archbishop McQuaid’s influence still obtained. The committee’s pro- 725 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

[Senator Joe O’Toole.] posal still excludes physical education from the aspects of education that need to be taught and dealt with in schools, at a time when we are pulling ourselves apart over the protection of children, the need for sex education, the need to inform children and the need for them to be able to deal with threats, victimisation and abuse. This is appalling. I understood there were people from various constitutional and legal backgrounds on the committee. I am completely appalled that the provision still maintains 70 years later.

Senator Ivana Bacik: I join Senator Fitzgerald in expressing concern about the outcome of the bishops’ talks in the Vatican. It is appropriate, given the enormous influence the bishops continue to have in the institutions of the State through the system of patronage of schools, that we express our concern, as legislators, about the lack of any sense of responsibility or accountability on the part of the Vatican for the appalling abuse of children that continued for so many years in our religious-run and State-funded institutions. It is relevant for us. On the day that is in it, I ask for a debate on the relationship between the church and the State and, in the light of what Senator O’Toole said, on the ongoing control of the churches, particularly the Catholic Church, of our national school system. Considering that 92% of national schools are still run by the Catholic Church, it is important that we debate the relationship between church and State. Yesterday I expressed concern about the recognition by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, of two new Catholic schools at a time when parents were crying out for more choice in education and more multi-denominational schools. Archbishop Martin has recognised this. We need to debate the issue as a matter of urgency. Let us not stop with the education system; let us also debate the role of prayer in our national institutions. Why, for example, do we have a prayer every time the Seanad sits? Why does the national broadcaster still broadcast the “Angelus”?

Senator Donie Cassidy: We are proud of them.

Senator Ivana Bacik: These are issues on which people on both sides have very strong views. Therefore, we need to debate them. The influence of the Catholic Church on the Constitution is still felt very strongly in respect of the role of women. It is very welcome to see a proposal to have a constitutional amendment to enshrine the rights of children in the Constitution. I am glad to see the place of parents, as carers of children, is recognised. We could include the phrase “parents of guardians” but that is a matter for debate. When talking about parents in respect of the new children’s rights amendment, we should be deleting from the Constitution the specific reference to mothers which remains in Article 41 and which has been condemned internationally and by our national review groups, including the expert Constitution review group in 2006. We should be replacing the reference with one that recognises the role of carers. I refer to gender-neutral recognition to allow fathers a place in the Constitution and remove the outdated notion that it is only women who have caring responsibilities in the home. Why not hold that non-controversial referendum at the same time as the children’s rights referendum? They are closely linked and it would improve the children’s rights referendum, improve the Constitution significantly and contribute to our status as a developing pluralist republic and move us away from the unhealthy dominance of the Catholic Church that still lives on in so many institutions.

Senator Marc MacSharry: On the issue of job creation, yesterday there were welcome announcements in the context of a number of schools around the country going to tender and construction. As we all are focused on the smart economy in the future, in the context of awarding these tenders for construction of the schools announced yesterday I want to see us focused on the sensible economy and ensuring to the fullest extent possible that those tenders 726 Order of 17 February 2010. Business are awarded to contracting companies within this jurisdiction, employing people in this jurisdiction, and paying and contributing to the Exchequer in this jurisdiction. In particular, of course, I focus on the Border countries. Indeed, there was one major announcement on Sum- merhill college in Sligo, which is long overdue and much welcomed. I very much hope that to the fullest extent possible the contracts can be awarded to contractors who, if not local, are certainly operating within this jurisdiction. It is worth noting that while the Germans, our senior partners in the EU, are fully supportive of the European concept, one will not see a single German public servant driving anything other than a German automobile and supporting German industry. I want to see us, while focusing on the smart economy, focusing on what I call the sensible economy, that is, seeking to support employment in this jurisdiction. I hope all of the €600 million which Government has announced will be expended in construction over the next year and which is to begin this year, will go through Irish companies to ensure employment is supported in this jurisdiction and that the Exchequer gets the benefit of revenues created by that.

Senator Paudie Coffey: I formally second Senator Fitzgerald’s amendment. Job creation should be one of the highest priorities, if not the highest, for all of us in the current climate. I want to bring to the Leader’s attention something that should be everybody’s concern, that is, a recent report by the University of Limerick which, following research, found that almost half of Irish mathematics teachers are not qualified to teach that subject. This should be of major concern. The report recommends that there should be postgraduate qualifications in mathematics. Is it any wonder that recently Engineers Ireland has shown real concern over the lack of engineering graduates? I question Government’s commitment to the area of science and engineering, if this is going on in our national and secondary schools. I ask the Leader to bring the Minister for Education and Science into the House to debate this important matter. Already we see science-based testing being exported out of this country. We will debate cancer research later. All the cervical smear testing is exported to America. We do not have our own national laboratory capable of conducting smear tests, which is a national disgrace. Senator Ó Brolcháin would know well about the cryptosporidiosis problem in Galway. All of that testing on water, our most natural resource, is exported to the UK and Scotland, which also is a national disgrace. If we seek real commitment in science and engineering, we need to address it at the fundamental level, that is, at school. It is a disgrace that almost half those teaching mathematics are not qualified to do so, and I ask the Leader to address that. Is it my imagination or is the Minister for Defence’s nose growing longer? The Leader might answer that. I would appreciate it.

Senator Mary M. White: I ask the Leader as a matter of urgency to invite the Minister of Education and Science to come and speak about the role of our universities in the life of the country in the 21st century. Dr. Craig Barrett, speaking in the Mansion House last week on education and competitiveness, spelt out the reason Intel came to Ireland 20 years ago was because of the high educational standard of our young people. He spelt out that we have lost our position in the league — we are now only average. He stated that our blueprint for success in the past had been foreign direct investment, and I agree. I believe that those days are over. We can no longer depend on foreign direct investment because we are not competitive in many areas. In the future investment must be made in indigenous ideas. New ideas come from universities in any country that is really competing at a serious level, such as the United States which has MIT, Stanford and Berkeley, and Israel which is a major competitive force. 727 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

[Senator Mary M. White.]

Our eye has been taken off the ball. We are no longer No. 1, even in the hunger for learning and education. We have become complacent over the past 20 years and this will continue unless the Government takes initiatives. UCD and Trinity College came into the top 100 universities league worldwide last year, but they are not wealth creators. We must get the universities to play their role in developing indigenous industry via research carried out by them. These are industries of the future will come from science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and the universities must become centres of wealth creators like Stanford, MIT and Israel’s universities. I want an urgent debate on the role of the universities as wealth creators and the development of indigenous industries in the future. On the current blueprint for foreign direct investment, we are no longer competitive and that era is over.

Senator Shane Ross: I endorse what many have said about the issue of employment being so important at present. It has been highlighted, as everybody will be aware, by the spat between the chief executive of Ryanair, Mr. Michael O’Leary, and the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Coughlan, in the past few days. If 11 o’clock one could put the theatricals aside for a minute, Mr. O’Leary has highlighted some extremely important issues to do with employment and with what is happening in the State’s ownership of certain semi-State companies. Not only does the State own 100% of the Dublin Airport Authority, DAA, it also owns 25.4% of Aer Lingus. These are the two bodies supposedly in conflict about hangar 6. I ask the Leader to have a debate on why the State still continues to insist on maintaining 100% of one and 25.4% of the other if, apparently, it has no clout in this matter. There is no point owning in a monopolistic way the DAA and owning 25.4% of Aer Lingus if one is getting no return commercially. These are two commercial dead ducks. They will not make the State any money, if the State cannot get a commercial return for what it is backing or cannot exercise any clout. We were told when Aer Lingus was partially privatised that the State insisted on holding 25.4% because it has a strategic national interest. Apparently, the Tánaiste is saying she is terribly sorry but there is damn all she can do to get these two bodies together to reach an agreement which will save 300 jobs. That is not acceptable. It begs the question of what the Government is doing with these two vital stakes. It should not hold them anymore if it cannot get a dividend or exercise clout. It also begs a question——

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s time is up.

Senator Shane Ross: ——as to the role of the DAA. Is it actually obstructing jobs? Is it a politically-appointed body with a board which does very little which has for long served the interests of Fianna Fáil? Can we do something about that in this House——

An Cathaoirleach: Time now.

Senator Shane Ross: ——immediately and debate the issue, not so much of general employment but of the role these two semi-State bodies are playing in obstructing jobs?

An Cathaoirleach: I call Senator Butler. I missed out on him yesterday.

Senator Larry Butler: I want to raise the issue of the all-party report on mortgages by the Joint Committee on Social and Family Affairs which was published yesterday. It brings forward 21 proposals with regard to the banking sector to ensure people currently in trouble in repaying their mortgages would have some say in how they can keep their houses into the future. I put a great deal into this report through the EBS which gave us solid banking proposals as to how 728 Order of 17 February 2010. Business this could work. I hope the Government will accept the proposals and introduce them as part of legislation for the entire sector, not just the Irish banking sector. A proposal has been made which I welcome that all banking establishments in this country obey the one year rule, but we are seeking a 24 month moratorium on the mortgages of all those who have lost their jobs. That is key to them being able to keep their houses. We have made suggestions on how the banks could take equity in houses, among various other proposals made in the report. God knows there are enough reports collecting dust on shelves. Senator MacSharry has put a great deal of work into his part of the proposals. This is one report which includes proper proposals with banking support from the EBS. It should be introduced as soon as possible and I call on the Government to do so. I will table a motion at the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party meeting next week to accept these proposals and ensure people in serious trouble would get a fair crack of the whip. The report also covers the issue of personal debt.

An Cathaoirleach: We are discussing the Order of Business, not parliamentary party business.

Senator Eugene Regan: Will the Leader arrange a debate on the Prevention of Electoral Abuses Act? It is a very important Act, of which section 15 provides that anybody guilty of an illegal practice under the Act shall be liable to a fine and that, during a period of five years from the date of his or her conviction, shall be incapable of being registered as a Dáil, Seanad or local government elector or voting in any Dáil, Seanad or local elections or at a referendum. Section 11 of the Act also provides that every person who, before or during any election or for the purpose of affecting the return of any candidate at that election, makes or publishes any false statement of fact in relation to the personal character or conduct of such candidate shall be guilty of an illegal practice. This is what happened in the case of the Minister for Defence, Deputy O’Dea. That is why it is a political issue, not a private citizen’s matter.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator has sought a debate on the matter.

Senator Eugene Regan: I am making that point.

An Cathaoirleach: I am not getting involved in naming any Minister or anyone else. The Senator has asked the Leader for a debate on the matter.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: It is a political issue.

Senator Eugene Regan: I have sought a debate and I am explaining why I want that debate and why I consider it important. There is a serious political issue——

An Cathaoirleach: A question only to the Leader.

Senator Eugene Regan: ——that must be addressed. That is what arises in the case of the Minister, Deputy O’Dea.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: The Senator is not allowed to mention someone unless he or she is a Member of this House.

Senator Eugene Regan: I wish to make another point to the Leader and it is also addressed to the leader of the Green Party in the House. The Minister’s statement does not give the full facts. I ask the leader of the Green Party, in particular, to examine the full facts of the case.

An Cathaoirleach: I am not getting involved in this.

Senator Eugene Regan: This matter was not disposed of by the High Court on 21 December 2008. 729 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

An Cathaoirleach: I am not getting involved with any matter that has been decided by the courts.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: It is a political issue.

Senator Donie Cassidy: It is an old Blueshirt tactic.

Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: The last time I spoke about the horrific sexual abuse of children I suggested that if we concentrated too much on the resignation of bishops, we could do an injustice to the victims. I believe that has happened. The horrific hurt felt by victims has become secondary to some extent. Even this morning there was a very broad swipe at the Catholic Church, involving everything from the Angelus on radio and television and the prayer in the Seanad to religious involvement in education. I am a little worried that the main issue in some cases is not the victims but targeting the Catholic Church. Last night I listened to the correspon- dent in Rome who had also covered sexual abuse issues in America, Australia and other countries. He made it quite clear that the bishops’ visit to Rome was part of a process, that what had happened in the last couple of days was only the first element of that process. If we make a pre-emptive and premature case about what we believe has emerged from the conference, we will not do justice to the victims. Will the Leader consider providing us with the opportunity to have not one but several debates on this issue? I accept we have had debates on the Ryan and Murphy reports but matters have moved forward since these reports were published. I suggest we invite not one but several Ministers to attend the debates. However, I appeal to all Members to be quite clear that it is the victims we wish to look after and to ensure it does not happen again. Please, do not let the Catholic Church be the target because in that case we will not do justice to anybody.

Senator Feargal Quinn: Yesterday I raised the issue of the delay in implementing legislation, particularly the legal services ombudsman legislation. In October 2008, almost 18 months ago, the House adjourned a debate on a Bill dealing with human organ transplants. The Minister said at the time that she was supportive of the objective of the Bill but wished to introduce her own legislation. I accept that she will do so but 18 months have passed. I urge her to introduce that legislation as soon as possible. I accept that her heart is in the right place and that she intends to do something about this, but consider what happened last month. At the end of January there were four kidneys and one pancreas available in Dublin for transplantation but there were 580 patients waiting for transplants. We are not sure why, although we have been told it might be due to a shortage of suitable beds, but only two of these kidneys were trans- planted. The pancreas and remaining two kidneys were sent to the United Kingdom for trans- plant patients there. There is an urgent need to deal with this matter. I believe the Minister’s view and objectives are in the right direction and that she is taking steps to introduce the legislation. However, it cannot wait and must be proceeded with immediately. There is a general problem with the State taking too long to do things; there is a lack of urgency about getting things done. On this occasion we should support the Minister and urge her to introduce the legislation as soon as possible and deal with the issue of presumed consent or whatever is required to provide in legislation for the ability to save the lives of people waiting for transplants.

Senator Terry Leyden: On 5 December 2008 I raised the issue of a solidarity bond which I called a reconstruction bond at the time. It was based on the savings scheme introduced by the former Minister for Finance, former Deputy Charlie McCreevy. I also raised the matter in January 2009 in the context of Anglo Irish Bank and again in May that year. The Minister has now introduced the bond in the Finance Bill. I ask the Leader of the House to give special 730 Order of 17 February 2010. Business consideration to the national solidarity bond. It is an enormous opportunity to raise money for investment in the country. It will also be a very attractive bond which we can sell throughout the world on St. Patrick’s Day. When he was Minister for Finance, Michael Collins sold a bond in America. The Minister for Finance, the Taoiseach, ambassadors and every Minister travelling from this country for St. Patrick’s Day should include in their speeches the fact that we are seeking investment. I encourage every Member of the House to put any spare cash they have into the bond. I intend to put mine into it. The bonds are for five years, seven years or ten years. One will get a return each year and a bonus at the end of the term. A Chathaoirligh, I am using this House to promote the bond on behalf of the country and I believe you, with your experience, will also promote it if you are away on St. Patrick’s Day on behalf of the State. There is no better man to sell it on behalf of the State.

An Cathaoirleach: It is irrelevant to the Order of Business who is where.

Senator Terry Leyden: I intend that we raise €10 billion. That is the limit and I ask those of us with a spare euro or two to invest. We could raise €3 million in this House alone.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: How does one follow that? Today is the first day of Lent, as Senator Fitzgerald said——-

An Cathaoirleach: Questions to the Leader.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: My question to the Leader concerns when the Government will be serious about tackling smoking and tobacco smuggling. I compliment the Irish Cancer Society for its efforts regarding the forthcoming national daffodil day. It is important to put the issue on the agenda. It is on the clár for today but we need to do more about smoking and ask people to abstain from it. My fundamental question for the Leader concerns whether the Government still understands the value of a job and employment in this country. As Senator Ross correctly said, we have a Government which is a stakeholder in the DAA and Aer Lingus and a Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment who cannot seem to bring jobs to this country and who has insulted young people by her comments regarding emigration. It is high time the Government published its policy on job creation or outlined whether the smoke screen which is Government policy has finally puffed away and it has no job creation policy. I am alarmed at the principled members of the Green Party who are sitting with their hands on their backsides, assisting Government in its lack of action.

An Cathaoirleach: That is unparliamentary language.

(Interruptions).

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I will rephrase it.

An Cathaoirleach: I do not want any rephrasing.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: Hands up.

Senator David Norris: On a point of order, the Cathaoirleach referred to a word employed by Senator Buttimer as unparliamentary, an accusation which has sometimes been levelled against myself. Is there a list of words which are unparliamentary which can be made available so as to avoid this situation?

An Cathaoirleach: Please, questions to the Leader. 731 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I will rephrase——

An Cathaoirleach: Your time is up.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: Given that I was interrupted a number of times——

An Cathaoirleach: Your time is up.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: I will finish on a serious note.

An Cathaoirleach: Your time is up.

Senator Jerry Buttimer: The issue of job creation is serious, and the Government has not acted on it. When will we see a Government stimulus package and a job creation policy being put in place?

An Cathaoirleach: The point is well made, Senator.

Senator Terry Leyden: He should withdraw that comment.

An Cathaoirleach: Please, no interruptions.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: I support other Senators who asked the Leader to keep child protection to the fore of our agenda. I agree with all Senators who have spoken on this issue, in particular Senator Ó Murchú when he said we need several debates. We do need several debates. The Senator said, quite rightly, that what happened in Rome over the past few days was the beginning of a process. If it is the beginning of a process, why is there so much public outcry against what is coming back to us? Groups such as the Rape Crisis Centre and those who are victims of child abuse have spoken against what has been brought back to us. I watched the news recently and saw our 25 bishops, who are all good men, in their long clerical robes and skull caps and it put the fear of God into me. I can imagine what it did to those who have been abused by clerics.

An Cathaoirleach: Questions to the Leader, Senator.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: The question is that we would keep child protection to the fore of our agenda. I heard two priests on the radio this morning. They discussed why the pope could not see fit to meet one or two high-profile victims who would carry the message of those who had been abused and hear their pain at first hand. Michael O’Brien asked that there be a message on Easter Sunday from the pope — that was all he asked for — to apologise, be humble and human and ask the victims to forgive the Church for what some of its members perpetrated. The church is still hiding behind canon law. The papal nuncio has been invited, yet again, to appear before the Joint Committee on Health and Children and the Joint Commit- tee on Foreign Affairs, but he is hiding behind red tape and has refused to come. We need such debates and I ask the Leader to keep the issue at the top of our agenda.

Senator David Norris: Like colleagues and victims, some of whom are priests, I am saddened and dismayed by the charade in Rome. Pope Benedict has a problem because he needs to explain the involvement of his office in the case of a Mexican priest who faces charges regarding the abuse of priests in seminaries. I understand his name is Marcial Maciel Degollado and he founded the Legionaries of Christ. The Pope has refused to answer questions on the matter from American television crews. It is all of a piece with the question of the papal nuncio, who has refused an invitation from the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, of which I have been a member since it was established. It is unusual to have such a refusal. Other ambassadors have 732 Order of 17 February 2010. Business appeared before the joint committee. As ambassador part of his function is to explain the position of the Vatican to the Irish people and its representatives, something which, on at least two or three significant occasions, he has failed to do. This raises the question of his position as doyen of diplomatic community in Ireland. It seems to illustrate the fact that one cannot serve God and mammon. In this instance Rome represents Christ and Caesar. Parallel to this is the curious intervention of the Iona Institute recently in the matter of the proposed referendum to protect the rights of children. It is very much a case of déjà vu.It reminds me of the mother and child controversy because the position of the Iona Institute, as enunciated today on radio, seemed to be that it was concerned that any protection of children as individuals, as proposed in the referendum, would perhaps impinge on the power and authority of the Church. In Ireland we now have a situation whereby the protection of children is paramount and is certainly of more significance than the power and authority of the Church. I raised in this House the question of a young man who was recently forced to take down a poster against homophobic bullying in a Christian Brothers school. I learned this week that the young man to whom I referred has been forced to withdraw from the school concerned because of continued bullying which has not been regulated. This is a situation we are continuing to face in this country.

Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin: There is nothing more important in the world, including the economy, than the protection of our children. I support calls from other Senators to have a series of debates on the protection of our children. I walked through places such as Letterfrack, which is one of the most beautiful parts of this country and the world, and saw the graveyard and experienced the feeling there. It is an extraordinarily powerful place. I ask the Leader to consider having a debate off-site in a place such as Letterfrack to commemorate the victims of the abuses which took place in the past. We need to take this matter very seriously and send out a message that our society has moved on and is taking the matter seriously. I wish to refer to Senator Buttimer’s comments about sitting on our hands and so on regarding jobs. That is not the case. Senator Coffey referred to laboratory services. I agree with him; there is great potential in laboratory services in Ireland and we need to have a debate on the matter. Job creation is very important and in areas such as laboratory services we could examine——

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: The Senator should talk to the Minister, Deputy Harney.

Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin: I will talk to her.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: She wants to outsource them all.

Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin: We could examine different methodologies and how to enhance laboratory services in this country. I will discuss the matter with Senator Coffey and I call for a debate on it.

Senator Paul Coghlan: As our banks stumble from one crisis to another the Government has become totally silent on the need for restructuring, which was touched on a year ago when we had a debate following the bank guarantee scheme and the need for recapitalisation. We understand the current position regarding the recapitalisation process. However, at that time the Government discussed restructuring, which it felt was necessary, and most people agreed with that view. What is happening? The Government has failed to engage in this matter. Talk of a third banking force has finished. Does the Government no longer believe in consolidation of building societies such as, for example, Irish Permanent and TSB? In the long-term landscape we will need competition. Or is policy solely about protecting the two main banks at this stage, 733 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

[Senator Paul Coghlan.] important though that may be? I accept it as such. We need a debate on this matter to understand or hear the Government’s updated thinking on where we are going. I agree strongly with the comments of Senator Ó Murchú. As he said, it is very important that this matter is dealt with comprehensively and that we do not set out to victimise the Catholic Church which, let us be honest, has been responsible for so much of what is good in Irish society, despite the appalling failures of the few. I agree that we must look after children as a first priority but let us be comprehensive in our comments. Let us not focus narrowly and lash and bash people wrongly.

Senator Ivor Callely: I support the call for a debate on job creation when this can be accommodated into our schedule in a meaningful way and the appropriate people are able to come to the House. I reiterate my call that we should revisit Government policy and strategy with regard to the aviation industry. Yesterday I said we should look to incentivising the industry, perhaps focusing on the north Dublin area where there is a related infrastructure and many qualified personnel. We have heard a great deal about hangars No. 6 and No. 7, that the first has been de-tooled and that its present value is different from the original. I said yesterday there was a big industry presence in aviation leasing and maintenance. Today, we read in the newspapers that one north Dublin-based company has a turnover of close to €2 million a week placing pilots and first officers with airline companies throughout the world. This is because of the reputation this country has in the area of aviation. I understand that company also places aerospace engineers. That is a single aviation company with a turnover of almost €2 million per week. It earned approximately €85 million to €90 million last year alone by placing staff. I ask Members to imagine what we could do in job creation if we were to focus our attention and incentivise this industry by way of a tax-free zone or whatever in the north Dublin area. The structure exists. I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on this so that we can revisit Government policy and strategy in this regard. A speaker referred to Government policy on smoking. Today is national no-smoking day and I hope it will help people who have the habit and that it will raise public awareness of cancer. I ask that Leader arrange a focused debate on prostate cancer——

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: Why not today?

Senator Ivor Callely: ——where 3,000 men——

(Interruptions).

An Cathaoirleach: There is to be a debate. I refer to No. 1 on which all speakers will be able to contribute.

Senator Phil Prendergast: I welcome former Senator Kathleen O’Meara and the representatives from the Irish Cancer Society and I look forward to the coming debate. I have a very serious question for the Leader. It relates to the reconfiguration of hospital services in the south east, in particular the hospital in Clonmel. Recently it was announced that 49 acute beds in the psychiatric unit were to be closed. These beds are factored into the general hospital complement and therefore this action will have a major impact on the reconfiguration of services which is under way. My concern is that the decision which was announced seems to have been made outside the knowledge of both the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, and the Minister of State with responsibility for mental health, Deputy Moloney, who kindly attended this House for an Adjournment debate on the matter. I am concerned that there are people within the HSE making serious decisions which will have a major impact 734 Order of 17 February 2010. Business although they have not been costed. We talk about money and fiscal responsibility and this would seem to be related but no costings were made with regard to this decision. I would like the Minister for Health, Deputy Harney, to come to the House and take part in a serious debate about the processes taking place. Who informs the Minister and Minister of State? How many times and by whom are they informed in respect of decisions announced by the HSE? Where is the disconnect occurring? A Minister asks for more time to consider proposals but then a decision is announced. Mine is a serious request and I wish serious consideration to be given to it.

Senator Paschal Mooney: I share the concerns and disappointment of all sides of the House regarding the breakdown of talks last night between the Tánaiste and Mr. Michael O’Leary. I have stated in and outside the House on many occasions that I applaud everything Mr. O’Leary and Ryanair have done to make air travel more accessible. The benefits they have brought to this country have been and continue to be enormous. However, my heart goes out, as I am sure do those of every Member, to the families of those who have been waiting patiently in hope, especially during the past week, that there would be a breakthrough which would restore a significant number of jobs. As perhaps the first Member to have returned to the House from the ranks of the unemployed, I can easily imagine the emotional roller coaster families are experiencing as they watch news programmes waiting to see whether there is any hope of their family member getting back his or her job. In that context I ask the Leader to say to the Tánaiste or the appropriate authorities that this issue cannot be allowed to be left to one side. I suggest there should be an attempt to schedule what are called “proximity” talks. This has happened in the North-South environment and in many other troubled spots around the world where conflict resolution has taken place. There is obviously a conflict here. I ask the Leader to say to the appropriate authorities that all relevant parties should come together without the glare of publicity. If I have one criticism of Mr. Michael O’Leary it is that he tends to take advantage of the very important position he has in the media.

Senator Paul Coghlan: Continuously.

Senator Paschal Mooney: Irrespective of whether it is right or wrong and irrespective of the agenda he is pursuing, everything he says is reported as if it is fact. Therefore, I suggest that such an action should take place outside the glare of publicity and that the parties should attempt to resolve the matter. It can be resolved, of that there is no question. Apropos of the remarks made by Senator White and in the context of a debate on job creation, I ask the Leader whether there might be a role for the newly appointed European Commissioner, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn. I am not sure if the House or the country in general understands the very great significance and importance of the portfolio she has been given. President Barroso said recently that the amount of money Google spends on research and development is in excess of the entire budget the European Union spends on the same. In that context and because of the many remarks made in the Chamber today, the Leader might consider having an explanation of Ms Máire Geoghegan-Quinn’s portfolio and perhaps might even invite her to the House.

An Cathaoirleach: Four Senators remain who indicated they wish to speak. My time is up. If I can bring them in, I ask them to be brief.

Senator Paschal Donohoe: I support the call by Senator Fitzgerald for a debate on job creation. I return to the point I made yesterday regarding the attitude of the Government to 735 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

[Senator Paschal Donohoe.] young people. I repeat that this Government is allowing young people to take the full burden of the change that has taken place in the jobs market and the full burden of adjustment and flexibility needed in our labour market. Tragically, further proof of this attitude emerged yesterday when the Youthreach programme, which is designed to look after people who leave school early and provide a plan to keep them in the education system, stated that 1,000 teen- agers were unable to access its 103 centres throughout the country. Six hundred places that were to have been created over the past two years to cope with the needs of the increased number of young people looking for jobs have not been created. They have been abandoned. It is apparent to me that it is not the places that have been abandoned, rather the young people themselves.

Senator John Hanafin: I support Senator Coghlan’s call for balance in debate, in particular when speaking about the Catholic Church. This House is ad idem about the terrible fact that child abuse took place and was undertaken by certain members of different churches. I am also conscious abuse is against the rules, diktats and the specific teaching of every church and is considered a most heinous crime. This is something we should remember and which should provide us with necessary balance. The church has, and continues, to come out strongly against all of those who undertook any despicable acts. I ask the Leader to mention the role of the Oireachtas in dealing with matters such as moral issues. Having been involved in different campaigns and having been very careful not to be seen to be sanctimonious or to draw conclusions about individuals, I am conscious the Oireachtas is not a particularly good place to debate individual cases of morality. Such debates become very much like a Salem witch hunt. Unfortunately, we have seen instances of individuals in the Oireachtas being questioned about what has happened. That does not seem correct, unless it affects their duty and work and is directly connected with them. As mentioned, I have been involved with issues regarded generally as moral issues and know that people must be very careful to deal with the generalities rather than the specifics.

Senator Rónán Mullen: I was very impressed by a point Sheila Nunan of the INTO made on radio this morning about the need for greater transparency with regard to the schools building programme. There is enormous frustration among school managers and communities around the country, not just with regard to delays on much needed projects, but with regard to the difficulty in accessing information. We have all raised Adjournment matters in the House asking similar questions and have received the same type of answer. It would be very much in the tradition of good public service if there was some better way to allow people to access information and track the progress of their projects. They could then ask the hard questions if those projects failed to progress. I compliment Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú on the sanity he brought to the debate regarding the talks in Rome in the context of child abuse. It is understandable and almost impossible to imagine that in the current climate people would not be disappointed. That will be a feature now and in the future. There is so much hurt and anger that this is inevitable. However, I wonder what the impact of an endless cycle of recrimination will be and what impact that will have on our ability to heal as a society. I do not deny that the church continues to make mistakes in its communications. It is on its knees in communication terms and I believe it is inevitable that there will be a meeting between the Pope and Irish victims of abuse. However, we seem to be at a position where if a particular thing is not said at a particular time, we go into outrage mode. I am very sorry when I see all of this tragedy and outrage being used to further separate agendas. If Senator Bacik believes in pluralism, as she says she does, she cannot have a problem 736 Order of 17 February 2010. Business with the establishment of Catholic schools if that is what communities want, if there is support for them and provided appropriate provision is also being made for atheists and other minorit- ies. That is real pluralism.

An Cathaoirleach: I call Senator McCarthy.

Senator Ivana Bacik: I was talking about what parents want. I do not think they want more Catholic schools.

An Cathaoirleach: Please allow Senator McCarthy contribute.

Senator Rónán Mullen: I spoke with a primary school principal last night who feels very strongly he is doing good work, as are other teachers throughout the country in Catholic run schools.

Senator Michael McCarthy: I join Senator Prendergast in welcoming former Senator, Kathleen O’Meara and her colleagues from the Irish Cancer Society to the House. On the day that is in it, I wish all such organisations well in promoting awareness of the dangers of smoking. This day six years ago, I kicked a 40 a day habit, not least because of the advice and encouragement of Kathleen O’Meara, who herself is a former smoker. It is very helpful for smokers to meet people who share their experience to help them give up smoking. The HSE intends to centralise all applications for medical cards to Dublin by the end of April. There has been no consultation with medical professionals, elected representatives, trade unions or local area health offices on this. We know from our experience with the decentralis- ation of the over-70s applications since December 2008, the system clearly does not work. A case I was made aware of concerns an applicant from Skibbereen for an over-70s card, who up until the decision to centralise the decision making process to Finglas would have had to go to his local area health office where his application would have been processed within two weeks. He applied for his card in July 2009, but he still has not got a reply. Clearly, the system does not work. Will the Leader arrange to bring the Minister to the House so we can hammer out the issues? Elected public representatives are picking up information that the system does not work. The centralisation of all applications is an area of Government policy that will add to bureaucracy and frustrate ordinary decent people.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: Many Members on both sides have spoken today about the importance of child protection. I agree with the Member who said this was the most important issue for us. If we are serious, we must ask the Minister for Health and Children to put the child protection guidelines on a statutory footing and to introduce mandatory reporting. While we fail to do that, our children remain at risk and let us not fool ourselves otherwise. The guidelines will protect all professionals and whistleblowers in reporting so that our children are safe in the future. I am also concerned ——

An Cathaoirleach: Has the Senator a question for the Leader or is she calling for a debate? We must move on.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I am concerned about the lack of strategic thinking by the Minister for Education and Science. Youthreach has been a solution for young people who have dropped out of school before the age of 16, some one in six schoolchildren. However, the Minister is now refusing these children places. This is an outrage. 737 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

An Cathaoirleach: If the Leader grants a debate on that the issues can be discussed then. The Senator has made the point.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I call for a debate with the Minister for Education and Science to discuss this. Furthermore, we need a debate on the critical situation where almost 50% of our maths teachers do not have a degree in maths.

An Cathaoirleach: Thank you Senator. I call the Leader to respond.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: Maths is of national strategic importance. We cannot go forward without our teachers being trained in this area.

An Cathaoirleach: I ask the Senator to respect the Chair. She should resume her seat and respect the Chair, no matter who is in it.

Senator Donie Cassidy: Senators Fitzgerald, O’Toole, Bacik, Ross, Ó Murchú, Quinn, Feeney, Norris, Ó Brolcháin, Mooney, Donohoe, Hanafin, Mullen and Healy Eames have all expressed their serious concern and made a strong case for justice for victims. The terrible things that happened in the past must not happen again. I wish to inform the House that the report on the Constitution will be before the House for consideration next Wednesday. On the Order of Business yesterday, many colleagues were concerned we keep the pressure on with regard to this issue. The report will be debated in the House next Wednesday and if enough time is not available, I will roll the debate over until the following week. Seanad Éireann will be to the fore in doing anything it can for the protection of children. I speak for colleagues on all sides of the House in this regard. On the issue of job creation, the Tánaiste was present here for a debate on this issue two weeks ago last Thursday. If colleagues are serious in their request for a further debate on job creation, I will include it in the diary for the coming weeks. However, I will only do that with strong assurance from party leaders that the time will not fall as happened on the last occasion. I want to be sure of the sincerity of the call for a debate. If colleagues commit to coming in and making their contributions, I will allocate as much time as necessary and the Tánaiste will make herself available for that time. The facts are, however, we have created 700,000 jobs in the past ten or 11 years. We also have 1.85 million people still at work, which is 600,000 more than in the downturn in the 1980s. It was said this morning that the Government is not committed to creating employment. It is fully committed to supporting and creating employment. Let me give a few examples. The employment subsidy scheme, which is designed to support and maintain vulnerable jobs and prevent people from being made redundant, has allocated €135 million to protect employment between 2009 and 2010. It is estimated that approximately 80,000 jobs will be directly and indirectly supported and retained as a result of the scheme. I personally know of many SMEs which are availing of this scheme and, at a meeting I attended last Saturday, it was said to be a godsend that the Government introduced this scheme to retain jobs that are hanging on by the fingernails. With regard to major investment in infrastructure, the Government has invested €6.4 billion in 2010, with priority in labour-intensive projects to support another 60,000 jobs. Investment by the Government in projects will include, as we now know, €500 million in school building projects, particularly in the maintenance sector, and over €800 million in local authority housing, including special needs accommodation and the public housing sector. Finally, in 2010, the Government is investing €1.15 billion in national roads, and nearly 300 km of new roads will be completed this year. These are the facts. We must acknowledge that in very difficult financial times a serious effort is being made by the Government to assist in every way possible. 738 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

Senators Bacik, Coffey, White, Ó Brolcháin and Healy Eames called for a debate on education and welcomed the €600 million announced yesterday for 52 new school projects which are going to tender or construction, or for which the appointing of design teams has been allowed. This is a very welcome announcement, particularly in regard to all of the structural engineers and quantity surveyors whose skills will be required at the planning stage, many of whom are in urgent need of work. I support Senator MacSharry’s point that we should do everything we can to ensure Irish companies are considered and that, if there is a 50-50 situation, an Irish company should be employed. We make no apologies to anyone for making a commitment to keep Irish people employed, particularly those who are in the qualified services sector, which is crucial because this is the first step in regard to all of the processes beginning again. I support the views of all Members who referred to this issue today. I will, of course, arrange a debate on education. I have made a commitment in this regard. I have had to change the date with the Minister because the Finance Bill is coming to the Seanad but I will endeavour to have a new date for the House and will inform Members in this regard, perhaps on the Order of Business on Tuesday next. Senator Butler referred to the issue of the all-party report on mortgages by the Joint Commit- tee on Social and Family Affairs in the context of the 24 months moratorium for those who have lost their jobs. I have no difficulty in having that report discussed in the House. It would be timely if we could discuss it with the Finance Bill, with the Minister for Finance present, and I ask Senator Butler to accede to this request. On the occasion of the Finance Bill, as I said, I intend to allow extra time for every Senator to make a contribution on Second Stage. I will take this proposal to the leaders’ meeting before the Order of Business next Tuesday. Senator Regan called for a debate on the Prevention of Electoral Abuses Act, which I have no difficulty in arranging. My long experience in both Houses would lead me to suggest to the Senator that the word here is “knowingly”. That is the problem with the case he is trying to make and I do not believe that will——

Senator Eugene Regan: Three months late.

Senator Donie Cassidy: I beg Senator Regan’s pardon. The point is that he is an eminent man. He did what the Senator and I could not get done — we could not get elected to the Dáil the last time.

Senator Eugene Regan: That has nothing to do with it.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: The Leader should stick to the point.

An Cathaoirleach: That is not relevant at all.

Senator Maurice Cummins: He swore an affidavit.

Senator Donie Cassidy: The people of Limerick have spoken on many occasions in regard to the public service the Minister, Deputy Willie O’Dea, has given. I salute him for his commitment——

Senator Paudie Coffey: He has brought shame to his office and to politics.

Senator Donie Cassidy: He writes a very important article in a Sunday newspaper and Fine Gael is trying to——

Senator Paudie Coffey: He has brought shame to his office and the Leader will not acknowledge it. He has brought shame to politics. 739 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

An Cathaoirleach: Order, please. Members should not cut across the Leader. He is replying to the questions asked.

Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: He should stick to the point.

Senator Donie Cassidy: It is an old Fine Gael trick — trying to gag a journalist.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: This is about standards.

An Cathaoirleach: The Leader should not invite interruptions.

Senator Donie Cassidy: Senator Quinn called for a debate on the matter of human body organs and he also noted the case last week where organs had to go the UK for transplants. I have no difficulty in having time allocated for this debate. Senator Leyden made one of the most worthwhile suggestions I have heard in a long time in the House this morning. I hope colleagues will support the advice of the long-serving former Minister of State and Deputy in regard to the national bond. Years ago, our forefathers invested their life savings to help the nation in its hour of need. This is a very worthwhile proposal and I hope many colleagues will tease it out with the Minister for Finance when the Finance Bill comes to the House. As Senator Leyden said, billions of euro could be raised by our own people to help the nation at this time. Senators Buttimer, Callely, Prendergast and McCarthy welcomed former Senator Kathleen O’Meara and her Irish Cancer Society team. I thank those Senators who thanked me for ensuring it would be on the agenda for Ash Wednesday. It is 31 years since I kicked the smoking habit. I sincerely hope many people will avail of the opportunity provided by Ash Wednesday and desist from the habit. Quality of life completely changes when one stops smoking. It is to the great credit of the Irish Cancer Society that it is doing so much in the fight against the plague of cancer. I welcome the Irish Cancer Society to the House. Senator Callely called for a debate on the aviation industry. The high quality staff involved are, as the Senator said today and yesterday, a huge asset in regard to what is happening at Dublin Airport. There is a trained staff of 1,000 people, no matter where Michael O’Leary wants to go. I have always saluted Mr. O’Leary’s endeavour and what he has done for Ireland and for tourism. He is a world leader and one of the most successful men in the world. At the same time, the biggest plus from the Government point of view, from Ryanair’s point of view and from all other points of view, including those of the IDA and Enterprise Ireland, must be the skilled staff of 1,000 people. It would take seven or eight years to bring those skills to the level they are at, and that is the big attraction at Dublin Airport. I sincerely hope common sense will prevail. The IDA and Enterprise Ireland will do all they can, as will the Tánaiste and the Government, because they are totally committed. As was said by colleagues today, perhaps now we can get away from the media side and find whether common sense can prevail. It would be a huge plus for the aviation industry because the potential is enormous. The number of planes Ryanair has, some 300, means these would be sustainable jobs. It would be a dream come true to have this happen. I know everyone concerned is doing whatever they can to ensure this can be facilitated. Senator Coghlan called for a debate on the banks. I hope the Senator can leave this matter until the Finance Bill is dealt with in two weeks’ time. We can certainly find out the up-to-date position in this regard. Senator Prendergast referred to hospital services in the south east, in particular the hospital in Clonmel. The Senator is very interested to know the up-to-date position. I have no difficulty in having the Minister come to the House for a wide-ranging discussion on health matters. The Senator can deal with this matter on that occasion. 740 Order of 17 February 2010. Business

Senator McCarthy again called for the Minister to reconsider the system whereby all medical cards are dealt with at one centre in Dublin. We all know this is not working — we cannot even get an answer on the telephone. As there is a huge amount of legislation to deal with and I have acceded to the request to have the debate on the report next week, with the Finance Bill before us the following week, I ask that the leaders would facilitate us in Private Members’ time on the question of medical cards. It is a huge issue for our senior citizens and those on the margins at this very difficult time.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: The HSE needs to get its act together.

Senator Donie Cassidy: I will discuss with the leaders how we can progress this issue or whether we can sit late on some day. It is an urgent matter. I thank the Senator for bringing it to our attention again today.

An Cathaoirleach: Senator Fitzgerald has moved an amendment to the Order of Business, “That statements on the Government’s plan for job creation be taken today”. Is the amendment being pressed?

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: Yes.

Amendment put.

The Seanad divided: Tá, 23; Níl, 30.

Tá

Bacik, Ivana. McCarthy, Michael. Bradford, Paul. McFadden, Nicky. Burke, Paddy. Mullen, Rónán. Buttimer, Jerry. Norris, David. Cannon, Ciaran. O’Toole, Joe. Coffey, Paudie. Phelan, John Paul. Coghlan, Paul. Prendergast, Phil. Cummins, Maurice. Quinn, Feargal. Donohoe, Paschal. Regan, Eugene. Fitzgerald, Frances. Ross, Shane. Hannigan, Dominic. Ryan, Brendan. Healy Eames, Fidelma.

Níl

Boyle, Dan. MacSharry, Marc. Brady, Martin. McDonald, Lisa. Butler, Larry. Mooney, Paschal. Callely, Ivor. Ó Brolcháin, Niall. Carroll, James. Ó Domhnaill, Brian. Ó Murchú, Labhrás. Carty, John. O’Brien, Francis. Cassidy, Donie. O’Donovan, Denis. Corrigan, Maria. O’Malley, Fiona. Daly, Mark. O’Sullivan, Ned. Ellis, John. Ormonde, Ann. Feeney, Geraldine. Phelan, Kieran. Glynn, Camillus. Walsh, Jim. Hanafin, John. White, Mary M. Keaveney, Cecilia. Wilson, Diarmuid. Leyden, Terry.

Tellers: Tá, Senators Paudie Coffey and Maurice Cummins; Níl, Senators Camillus Glynn and Diarmuid Wilson.

741 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

Amendment declared lost.

Order of Business agreed to.

Cancer Awareness: Statements. An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady.

Minister of State at the Department of the Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): I particularly welcome the opportunity to address the Seanad on the topic of cancer awareness today, national no smoking day. Cancer is a leading cause of mortality, with approximately 8,000 people dying of the disease each year. Awareness of the early signs and symptoms of cancer and what we can do to prevent it is, therefore, hugely important. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths, killing around 1,600 people each year. It is followed by colorectal cancer which is responsible for around 1,000 deaths per annum; breast cancer, with around 670 deaths, and prostate cancer which kills around 540 men annually. However, cancer is increasingly viewed as a condition which people can expect to survive. According to the latest available figures, survival rates in Ireland for almost all types of cancer have improved. This is a trend that must continue in order that the 23,000 or so Irish people diagnosed with invasive cancer each year have the best possible outcomes, on a par with our European neighbours. The National Cancer Registry predicts that the incidence of cancer is set to increase steadily in the coming years. This is due mainly to the increasingly older age profile of the population. Cancer predominantly affects older people, with approximately 60% of cases diagnosed in people aged 65 years and over. However, in speaking about cancer awareness 12 o’clock particularly we need to remember that cancer can develop at any stage in life. Cancer awareness is often used to refer to awareness of the possible signs and symptoms of cancer. This is very important. In speaking about cancer awareness we also need to be aware of what steps we can take to reduce our risk of getting cancer. It is estimated that around 30% of cancers may be preventable. Cancer-preventing behaviours should be practised by everyone. For those cancers that do occur, early detection is a key factor in achieving the best possible outcome. Prevention and early detection are emphasised in the European Commission’s European code against cancer. The code is a simple list of recommendations that reinforces two clear messages. First, certain cancers may be avoided and health, in general, can be improved by adopting a healthier lifestyle. Second, cancers may be cured, or the prospects of cure greatly increased, if they are detected early. That is why we all should be aware, first, of the risk factors and, second, the possible early signs and symptoms. Obviously, prevention and early detection must also be key aspects of public health policy. As many people will be aware, cancer control is a priority for the Government and significant resources have been made available for cancer screening and the development of cancer services under the national cancer control programme. Regarding services for those diagnosed with cancer, more than €56 million in development money has been provided to the cancer programme since 2007 to enhance and reorganise cancer services, €20 million of it this year. In that time, we have had the complete reorganis- ation of breast cancer services and major progress has been made on other site-specific cancers, including lung and prostate, two of the most common cancers. Cancer screening clearly has a major role in early detection and, for some cancers, in prevention. The National Cancer Screening Service, which this year will be integrated into the national cancer control programme, has responsibility for the delivery of the BreastCheck and Cervi- calCheck programmes and this year is undertaking preparatory work for the introduction of a 742 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements colorectal screening programme. Considerable resources have been made available for these screening programmes. This year, more than €64 million has been allocated to the NCSS which continues to make significant progress in the implementation of Government policy in this area. Last year, the NCSS completed the national roll-out of BreastCheck. Now, anywhere in Ireland, women aged 50 to 64 have access to free mammograms every two years. By 2008, BreastCheck had screened more than 275,000 women and detected more than 3,500 breast cancers. Last year, approximately 120,000 more women were screened and this year we expect the figure to be higher again. However, it is important to stress that any woman who has concerns that she may have possible symptoms of breast cancer should contact her general practitioner who will refer her to the symptomatic breast service in her area as appropriate. In 2008, CervicalCheck was established nationwide. The programme provides free smear tests every three years to women aged 25 to 44 years of age and every five years for women aged 45 to 60. In 2009 approximately 280,000 women were screened. For the first full year of operation up until September 2009, CervicalCheck operated on an open access system. This was done to accommodate the initial expected interest in the programme. Eligible women were able to obtain their free smear test without the necessity of an invitation letter. In September 2009, CervicalCheck moved to a call-recall system in line with best international practice. It ensures an effective and efficient approach to cervical screening is maintained and the target uptake of 80% is achieved. In particular, the call-recall system allows CervicalCheck to target women in low uptake cohorts for participation in screening. In addition to the call-recall system, there is a fast-track opt-in facility for any woman aged 25 to 60 who has not had a smear test in three years or more. Such women can opt in on-line, by phone or by post. There are additional exemptions to invitation-only screening, including women over the age of 60 who have never had a smear test and women regardless of age undergoing colposcopy treatment follow-up. Approximately 250 to 300 new cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed each year and there are 70 to 100 deaths. The incidence is relatively low compared with other cancers. However, cervical screening when combined with a HPV vaccination programme has the potential to reduce significantly over time the incidence of cervical cancer and the number of deaths caused by it. Therefore, last month the Minister, Deputy Harney, announced the introduction of an HPV vaccination programme to begin later this year. I remind those eligible women and girls to be aware that cervical cancer can be prevented and I urge them to participate in these programmes. The Minister for Health and Children also announced in January the beginning of preparatory work for the roll-out of a colorectal cancer screening programme. Colorectal cancer kills approximately 1,000 Irish people each year and it is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in Ireland. The introduction of colorectal screening is a critical development for both men and women. The programme will commence in 2012 for men and women aged between 60 and 69, irrespective of where they live. The programme will be extended to all those aged 55 to 74 years of age as logistics and resources allow. Like cervical screening, colorectal screening brings benefits in terms of prevention, through the removal of pre-cancerous growths, and early detection. I urge all those eligible to participate in this programme when it commences. Approximately 30% of all cancers can be prevented and addressing lifestyle risk factors is obviously very important in cancer prevention. The European Commission’s European Code against Cancer outlines some of these, including diet, physical activity and tobacco use which accounts for almost one third of cancer deaths. As today is national no smoking day, I take this opportunity to reiterate the message that smoking causes cancer. I cannot urge people strongly enough to be aware of the dangers of smoking and to use the resources that are 743 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Deputy Áine Brady.] available to help them give up. The website, www.giveupsmoking.ie, and the national smokers’ Quitline at 1850201203 are there to offer advice and support. While any advances have been made with regard to smoking and smoking control in Ireland in recent years, including a ban on advertising and the workplace smoking ban, much remains to be done. Worryingly, while the incidence of lung cancer among men is falling, the incidence among women is rising and we expect that in the next couple of years, lung cancer will be responsible for more deaths among women than breast cancer. We must also remember that more than three quarters of all smokers in Ireland started to smoke before they reached the age of 18. The Minister, Deputy Harney, has already put in place a number of measures to prevent young people smoking, including banning the sale of packs of less than 20 cigarettes, a ban on all in-store and point-of-sale advertising of tobacco products and a ban on the display of tobacco products in retail premises. The NCCP community oncology programme is also involved in smoking cessation, and is working with HSE primary care teams and health promotion personnel to pilot smoking cessation training in selected primary care teams. The fact remains that people still smoke although everyone is or should be aware that smoking causes cancer. Awareness must be translated into action. I urge people to take action for themselves on smoking and to use the supports available to help them give up. Smoking is not the only aspect of lifestyle to be aware of. Diet and physical activity are also significant elements in cancer prevention and control. National physical activity guidelines were developed in 2009 which set out appropriate levels of physical activity for all ages and abilities among the population. Not all cancers can be prevented and where a cancer is present, early detection significantly improves outcomes and survival rates. The national cancer control programme has stated that comparison with other jurisdictions shows that advanced stage of disease at presentation is more common in Ireland. I mentioned earlier initiatives on lung and prostate cancer. The NCCP identified in particular that access to diagnosis for both of these cancers was problematic and decided that this must be enhanced. This is being done through the establishment of rapid access diagnostic clinics for both of these cancers in each of the eight centres. To date, five rapid access lung clinics and four rapid access prostate clinics have been established so that patients can be fast-tracked for access to early diagnosis and multidisciplinary decision making as appropriate. The fact that prostate and lung cancer are among the most frequently diagnosed cancers in Ireland makes this initiative very important. I reiterate the importance of early detection and the need for anyone who may be experiencing worrying signs or symptoms not to wait but to attend his or her GP for advice. GPs have a crucial role to play as the first point of contact for patients who may have possible symptoms of cancer or may be at risk. In this regard, the cancer programme is working with GPs and with the Irish College of General Practitioners to develop capacity and knowledge among health professionals in the community to promote best practice in cancer control. Aspects of this work include a focus on GP cancer education and the development of standard- ised GP referral guidelines for the common cancers, including the introduction of electronic referral. We cannot speak here today of cancer awareness without speaking of the enormous contribution made by the Irish Cancer Society, the Marie Keating Foundation, Europa Donna and other organisations in raising awareness. Senators may recall the Irish Cancer Society’s bowel cancer awareness month last year, which was particularly useful in raising awareness of the symptoms of colorectal cancer and I want to acknowledge very strongly the society’s generous contribution towards the preparatory costs of setting up the screening programme which I mentioned earlier. 744 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

Europa Donna, with financial assistance from the Department, has recently produced a very informative and helpful leaflet on breast cancer. The Marie Keating Foundation travels to communities and workplaces to provide information and education to schools, communities and workplaces. I commend these organisations and others like them for the tremendous efforts they make in the fight against cancer. I have outlined many of the areas on which the Government and the cancer programme are focusing in order to enhance prevention and early detection of cancer. That is the focus in terms of public health policy. We as individuals must also play a part in relation to cancer prevention and early detection. That means seeking to adopt healthier behaviours, such as stopping smoking, eating healthily and taking more exercise. It means participating in screening programmes where these are provided. It means being aware of our own health and visiting the doctor promptly if we notice a sign or symptom that may cause concern. I should like to end on a positive note because there is much that is positive. Cancer services have improved significantly in Ireland in recent years and the work of the national cancer control programme is having a significant impact on the organisation and delivery of services. Hundreds of thousands of people are already being screened for common cancers each year and more is being done in this area. Most importantly, survival is improving.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: I welcome the opportunity to speak on cancer awareness, given that today has been designated national no smoking day. It is particularly appropriate that we are having the discussion on our cancer services today and I shall focus on those areas concerning which I have questions for the Department as regards its policies and how it intends to develop them in key areas. The Minister of State outlined the great progress that has been made in this area, and I acknowledge that. I acknowledge the move, for example, to the specialist breast cancer services. Despite some hiccups in the course of that transformation, it is extremely important that people are treated in specialist centres and this has been shown, undoubtedly, to have a clear advantage for the patient. It does not mean there are no issues as regards transferring from one service to another. Recently I came across a woman who had transferred from Tallaght Hospital to St. Vincent’s and there are difficulties with such transfers. We have to take patients’ needs very seriously to ensure the transfer from one service to another is achieved with all possible support for the patient. This is particularly important when the patient is in the middle of his or her treatment, when great care and support is needed during the transition. I shall focus first on the area of smoking. It is very clear that this is an enormous problem in Ireland, given that smoking is a causative factor in 30% of cancers. Some progress has been made, undoubtedly, but I am extremely concerned that cancer society experts believe the Government has still not faced up to the need for a well-funded countrywide and co-ordinated “stop smoking” service. How to give up smoking is the big problem for individuals, as well as finding out what supports are available. It is clear from statistics internationally that if well- funded support services are in place for the 5% of the population approximately that need them, there will be a corresponding decrease in smoking. It is very worrying to read about the high levels we still have, equivalent to 29% of people living in Ireland. Obviously, there is a correlation between the effectiveness of the “stop smoking” initiatives and the amount of expenditure on them. We are all looking for value for money and I am aware money cannot be handed out lightly these days. However, one needs to look at the returns for such expenditure. Some 30,000 people will be diagnosed with cancer in Ireland this year and new cancer cases are expected to reach more than 43,000 by 2020. One can see, therefore, that prevention is extremely important. We must encourage people not to start smoking, but if we can reach those who do, then the savings will 745 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator Frances Fitzgerald.] be enormous both in cash and in health terms. It is a matter of some concern that at the height of the discussion about the ban on smoking in 2004, Quitline got 19,000 calls, while in 2009 it received just 5,765 calls. We need to examine the national approach to the co-ordination of such services. If we are serious about prevention and getting the message to smokers that they can quit, although needing help, then plans should be put in place to ensure this happens. The second policy area I should like to address is the breast cancer mammogram service. That is now a countrywide initiative, but it is outrageous that it has taken ten years. I hope this will not be a precedent for how long it will take to roll out other countrywide screening programmes for various cancers. Too many people died while we were waiting for that service to roll out, and I do not accept the excuses that were made. Further issues need to be addressed in this regard. We need to extend the age group that can avail of the service, as there is a false sense of security among women of 65 and over because the service ends at that point, since we know that breast cancer incidence increases with age. The programme should be extended to 70. In terms of younger women, I understand the evidence is still being studied as regards whether the service should be made available to those aged 45, as in other countries. As regards lung cancer, it is very disturbing that the outcomes are so poor in Ireland. It is extremely disturbing that by the time many patients are diagnosed with lung cancer, it is too late to treat them. There are enormous issues as regards awareness of symptoms and getting to the doctor early. It is disturbing, too, to note that more women are now going to die from lung cancer than breast cancer, since more and more have taken up smoking. There are major challenges in that area in terms of reaching young women in particular. The same applies to young men in terms of cancer prevention, the need to be aware of the services that are available, getting to GPs early and dealing with the issues. Undoubtedly, there has been progress, but the challenges are enormous. I should like to see more focus on health promotion, because it is clear there are enormous lifestyle issues connected to the incidence of various cancers, although not all, and this needs to be addressed in Ireland. These vary from smoking, which is well-proven, to obesity and lack of exercise. Most people are aware that some of the incidences reflect a combination of lifestyle factors that have precipitated the development of particular forms of cancer. These are factors which must be taken very seriously. I also want to raise the whole area of sunbeds. The Minister promised legislation in relation to this, and very disturbing information is emerging as regards the use of sunbeds. I want to put some of this on the record and ask the Minister of State when the legislation will be introduced to deal with this. The very least we should be doing is banning the use of sunbeds for children under a certain age, whether 16 or 18, and I am sure the Minister is examining that. However, should we not be considering whether these products are so dangerous that they should be banned completely? This is certainly open to question, given the information emerging internationally in relation to them. Young women in particular, rather than young men, are very much at risk as regards the use of sunbeds. They were regarded for a long time as being quite innocent, but it has emerged that they are not as innocent as they might look. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC, has stated they are as carcinogenic as cigarettes. It is problematic when people see them as quite innocent when they are not. We need, therefore, an information campaign on the dangers of sunbeds. In its international study of sunbeds, the IARC also found lax operating procedures in tanning salons. Regulation through legislation is much needed in this area as it is far too dangerous to leave untouched.

746 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

Concerning statistics have emerged about waiting times for colonoscopies. Susie Long was not able to access a colonoscopy when she needed it and subsequently it led to her death. When her case was debated, we were promised no one in urgent need of the procedure would have to wait more than four weeks. The number of patients, however, now waiting more than six months for the procedure across all hospitals has increased by 34%. At Tallaght hospital, for example, it has doubled from 90 to 177. I accept people’s awareness has increased and more people are being referred for colonoscopies. Will the Minister of State clarify how these services will be further developed? When will the colonoscopy screening programme be fully rolled out? When will it be extended from the 60 to 69 age group to the 55 to 74 age group? Will the services be provided in the eight regional centres or on a more widespread basis? I appreciate more moneys are being spent on cancer services. This was necessary, however, given the toll it takes in Ireland. Will the vaccine for cervical cancer be available from September or will it be rolled out in April to benefit current school goers?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: I must ask Senator Fitzgerald to conclude.

Senator Frances Fitzgerald: I pay tribute to the work done by the Irish Cancer Society, Europa Donna and the Marie Keating Foundation in informing us about and highlighting these issues and demanding action be taken on them.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: I hope I will be allowed a few extra minutes as well.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Senator Fitzgerald was not allowed a few extra minutes.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: With the permission of the House, may I share time with Senator O’Malley?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: To start on the note Senator Fitzgerald finished on, I would like to acknowledge the great work done by the Irish Cancer Society, Europa Donna and the Marie Keating Foundation. I smiled when I heard Senator Fitzgerald deliver her presentation, as it appears we all access the same websites to get our information. Each of these organisations have been very helpful, particularly the Irish Cancer Society. I commend them on the great efforts they put into cancer awareness. Today is national non-smoking day. There is a school group of young students from Meath in the Visitors’ Gallery. One of them I believe is a little girl, Annie Madden, whose dad I know. I would have hoped they could have stayed long enough to hear of the terrible things that can happen when ones smokes.

Senator Rónán Mullen: They have to go back to Dangan.

Senator Geraldine Feeney: It is important for little boys and girls their ages never to start smoking. I am delighted the group has sat down again to hear what we have to say about this. This morning when I accessed one anti-smoking website, I noted a packet of 20 cigarettes costs €8.40 and I thought who can afford to buy a pack every day. A 20-a-day smoker who stops will save €58.80 a week, €250 a month, the equivalent of a monthly food budget, and over €3,000 a year, allowing one to take off to sunnier climes. Having €3,000 in one’s pocket to book a nice holiday on such a nice but cold morning should be more than an incentive to give up smoking. 747 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator Geraldine Feeney.]

This does not include the wonderful health benefits from stopping smoking. It will help in making breathing easier, reducing high blood pressure, the risk of sudden death from a heart attack or stroke and enhancing taste and smell. One would also begin to enjoy a better quality of life due to more energy and being able to participate fully in physical exercise. Senator Fitzgerald gave out about the time taken to roll out the BreastCheck screening programme. The former Senator, Kathleen O’Meara, who is in the Visitors’ Gallery, will remember how we roared and screamed in the Chamber about BreastCheck in the last Seanad. I always said that Rome was not built in a day and that BreastCheck would not be rolled out in a day. Is it not great it is now in place? We should commend and applaud this. Several hundred women have benefited from it with earlier detection of breast cancer. This morning I was delighted when a member of the Irish Cancer Society told me it commended the Government on bringing through no-smoking legislation. While it is great not to have smoking in the workplace, pubs and restaurants, we cannot sit back. Money needs to be put into more awareness campaigns. Driving between Dublin and Sligo, the motorist will notice the large Paul Allen advertising billboards which could be used to display the quitting smoking helplines, those numbers that are like little mantras. A driver trying to give up smoking would be encouraged to dial one of those numbers, all the easier with hands-free sets in cars now. We have to strike while the iron is hot. I commend the Minister of State, the Department of Health and Children and the Government on no-smoking legislation but they must keep going on it. Screening for breast and cervical cancers is in place while bowel cancer screening is imminent. On this morning’s Order of Business there were calls for more prostate cancer screening. There are no two medical minds of the same view as to the road we should travel regarding such a screening programme. The way to go is to continue with research. Sunbeds are the largest disaster that ever came into any country. Some 30 years ago, as a young married woman, I opened a small business in my home which had a sunbed. I used it without any regulation and the only item I needed was a loan from the bank for it. When I think about it now, I shudder in my little boots as to what I was exposing myself and others. There should be an all-out ban on children under 16 years using sunbeds. Once we introduce such a measure we should then consider a total ban. There is no regulation at present. The effects these machines may have on a person are equally if not more negative than the effects of smoking between 20 and 40 cigarettes per day. I cringe and I am sickened to the core when I think of mothers dressing their little girls for Holy Communion or Confirmation and who introduce them to sunbeds. I suggest those mothers should go and buy fake tan instead. I have two young daughters and their sheets are destroyed because of fake tan but at least I can wash them and I do not have to go to the accident and emergency ward. I am pleased to note the progress in early detection in respect of lung cancer. There are rapid access venues and clinics opening now. I am pleased to note the developments in respect of specialist units and I understand the transition is going well and that there are no major problems. The more we can debate the matter in this way, the better for the whole area of cancer treatment.

Senator Fiona O’Malley: I thank Senator Feeney for sharing time because otherwise I would not have had time to contribute. I will be brief. Like Senator Feeney, when the young children came into the Gallery some minutes ago I was struck by how many of them will end up smoking and what would make them smoke. I cannot understand anyone of my generation who smokes because we are very aware of the health issues around smoking. More research must be done 748 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements and I trust this will take place. We must find out what makes children smoke. Unless we find out and then target resources to combat those reasons we will not make progress. Senators Fitzgerald and Feeney commented on the use of sunbeds. Vanity is a great deterrent and if people were aware what sunbeds could do to their skin they might not be inclined to use them. Visual images of the harm that can be done should be available. I recall the topic was raised in a discussion last year about cancer. When will we see the introduction of graphic images of the physical harm caused by smoking on packets of cigarettes such that it might deter people? It baffles me why people continue to smoke when they know how bad it is for their health. Will the Minister of State indicate if there is an intention to carry out research into what motivates people, especially young people, to smoke? When one sees all the lovely young children in the Gallery one wonders what would tempt them into such a detrimental practice or habit, which is very hard to break once started. We must work on prevention. This is a transformative time in Ireland in the area of cancer. Much of the change has been unpopular but I applaud the Department, the Minister and the Ministers of State working in this area because it has been very difficult to transform Irish cancer care services and the Government has not always received support in this area. The Department and the Minister have been focussed on the outcomes. In her contribution, the Minister of State suggested the outcomes are most important and that they are improving all the time, a point Senator Fitzgerald acknowledged. That something is unpopular is no reason to deviate from the plan and I commend the work of Professor Keane in this area. It will be some years hence before we see the outcome and the changes in peoples lives. We must stick to the plan. It is incumbent on all of us to remember that people will benefit and outcomes will be improved if we consolidate services and stick with the plan. Everyone seeks the assurance that they are being treated in the best available facility. I seek an answer to a question. Will the Minister of State clarify that no matter whether one is a public or private patient, one is treated equally when it comes to cancer care? This should be very clear but there is a sense of ambiguity and a suggestion that if one pays privately for health care one may be fast-tracked. Will the Minister of State outline the case categorically?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Before I call Senator Norris, I welcome the former Senator Kathleen O’Meara to the Gallery.

Senator David Norris: I join in that welcome. Ms O’Meara is a distinguished former colleague and has represented the Irish Cancer Society. I express my admiration for the work done by this organisation. I also welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady, and I seek the permission of the House to share time with Senator Rónán Mullen. This is a serious situation and the facts are stark. This year, some 30,000 people will be diagnosed with cancer. This may be partly due to better diagnostic techniques but by 2020, it is estimated some 43,000 will be diagnosed, a very large number of people. We are all aware of this because we all know friends and close acquaintances who have been affected. In political life we have been shocked and saddened by the onset of cancer in Deputy Brian Lenihan and we all wish him well and a complete recovery from this very difficult form of cancer. It is something that affects everyone in society and it is very widespread. Previously in the House, we have dealt with the tobacco industry, its dishonesty and the way it lobbied over smuggling, whereas we know perfectly well and, I am glad to say, we have put on the record of the House that the major tobacco companies have all been implicated and convicted of smuggling in the United States. I will concentrate on lung cancer and sunbeds. More people die from lung cancer in Ireland than breast, prostate and colon cancer combined, a very shocking statistic. There is also a 749 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator David Norris.] cultural shift. Men used to be more significantly affected but now women are catching up and the gap in closing. We must treat this as a human problem generally speaking. I am not terribly in favour of dividing and prioritising on the basis of gender, particularly with regard to screening. I welcome the roll-out of the breast screening programme. I am also glad that men’s cancer, especially prostate cancer, is now being taken seriously, along with colorectal cancer which affects both men and women. One difficulty is that we have a very bad record in terms of the treatment of cancer in this country. We are one of the worst in Europe in terms of lung cancer. Perhaps this is because it is not caught in time. Given this worrying figure, we must re-prioritise things so that the Government assists in rapid access to diagnostic sources, clinics and treatment, especially for lung cancer. I refer to the Quitline, a matter that has been mentioned by other Members. There is a very clear payback for investing in Quitline. Our neighbouring country, the United Kingdom, almost doubled its spending on quit line services and there was a very significant drop, from 27% to 24% in the rate of smoking. It may only be a change of 3% but it represents a very significant effect in terms of the numbers. At the same time, our investment dropped and our rate of smoking went up from 27% to 29%, which indicates we must invest heavily in this area. In 2004, the quit lines received almost 20,000 calls. In 2009, this had dropped to 5,750 calls, a massive drop resulting from a lack of investment. We know the quit line works and we should continue the service. On this lovely sunny day on which we may be seeing the beginning of spring at last, I wish to be positive. There were three lovely, wonderful and beautiful young women on television one day recently, all of whom had cancer and one of whom had cancer three times. They were happy, positive, able to recover and living, which is marvellous. We should destroy the terror, mystique and horror of cancer and we can do so in positive ways. The Irish Cancer Society has done so and has shown the economic impact of giving up smoking which, in these difficult economic times, is a significant indicator. I used to be put off somewhat by the view that if one stopped smoking it would be ten years before one’s lungs recovered, if ever. In fact, after 20 minutes one’s blood pressure and pulse return to normal, which is instant; after 24 hours the risk of heart attack begins to fall; after 48 hours the sense of taste and smell greatly improve; after 72 hours breathing becomes easier and energy levels increase; and after one year the risk of heart disease and lung cancer begin to fall significantly. However, we must do more. We deal with legislation in these Houses and we passed the Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Act in 2009, which introduced the enabling legislation for pictorial warnings. We know these measures work. I remember a not so gory advertisement that asked if one would like to kiss an ashtray. While I would not, I probably have done so in my time. Pictorial warnings register with one in that they are unpleasant and communicate in an anti-social way. However, we do not have a timeline for the implementation of the enabling legislation. Will the Minister of State indicate whether the Government is serious about having a guideline on this? Sunbeds are not just used by women. I do not believe women are any more vain than men. I used to be in a gym for many years and there was no control over the sunbeds. There was no malicious intent on the part of the staff but they did not really know what they were offering, which is worrying. Some of these machines emit levels of ultraviolet radiation and other forms of radiation that are otherwise only deemed acceptable in medical treatment. The people who offer sunbed services are not qualified and have no idea about the levels of radiation being 750 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements emitted. This is partly, but not entirely, responsible for the significant rise in malignant melanoma, skin cancer. There were 660 new cases of malignant melanoma in 2007 and this number will increase. There was a 75% increase in the risk of cutaneous melanoma when people began tanning regularly in sunbeds before the age of 30 years. I ask that this matter be prioritised. I have asked about the pictorial advertisements and investment in the health side. My third question also relates to prioritisation. Are we to prioritise the legislation? Although the Bill is being drafted, a process which is taking a hell of a long time, it is disappointing that we are told it will not be ready before mid 2011. This is not good enough because we know the position. The information to which I refer is generally known throughout the Houses and must be known in the Department of Health and Children. While I recognise there is pressure on all Departments, I ask for specific information on the three aforementioned areas. It is a matter of prioritisation and we know taking action will do good. The image of the Quitline service came into mind particularly because I was listening to the very good broadcast in the lead-up to Daffodil Day. I remember taking part in several events that were great fun. There were photographs of beautiful young women and beautiful young me in the middle sporting daffodils. The point being made is that there is not enough advertising. People will use the Quitline service but it needs to be advertised. People do not know the number, which is 1850 201 203. We need to invest in this service.

Senator Rónán Mullen: Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire agus roimh ár n-aíonna ó Chumann Ailse na hÉireann. Ba mhaith liom tréaslú leo as an dea-obair a dhéanann siad gan staonadh do leas an phobail. Is léir go bhfuil ardmheas orthu agus ar an obair a dhéanann siad i measc an phobail. Is léir freisin go bhfuil na polaiteoirí anseo ag braith orthu le muid a choimeád ar an eolas maidir lena bhfuil le rá againn faoin ábhar seo agus muid ag iarraidh dul i ngleic le fadhb na hailse sa tír seo. In congratulating the Irish Cancer Society and other groups on the good work they do, I acknowledge we are very dependent on them for keeping the issue of cancer in the public eye and keeping politicians briefed on the issues they need to be underlining. Today, as we all know, is not only Ash Wednesday but also national no smoking day, the day on which we should be speaking about cancer. The cancer statistics that have been rehearsed up to now are depressing. Twenty-nine per cent of the population smokes. We discussed at budget time the impact of adding an extra €1 to the price of cigarettes and heard the rebuttals, which focused on smuggling and such practices. Despite our best efforts, the absolute focus needed from the Government to nail the problem of smoking is not evident. It is particularly depressing to see younger people falling for the habit of smoking. This raises all sorts of questions about the quality of our culture and family life. It has always been the case that younger people wanted to try things out but we have never been more educated or conscious of the dangers. It is remarkable, therefore, to see recurring issues of human folly, such as young people falling for smoking, perhaps under the bad influence of family and peers and, to make matters worse, to see parents taking their children to sunbeds in advance of their Confirmation or Holy Communion. I heard Senator Feeney’s little plug for the fake tan industry but I would like to believe we could be even more ambitious and have a culture that is less superficial and tries to promote the idea that true beauty does not depend on the colour of one’s skin or what one is wearing on it. A serious issue arises as to how law and culture intersect. It is absolutely right to talk about the Public Health (Tobacco) (Amendment) Act. The enabling legislation for pictorial warnings was introduced but the Department does not appear to have a timeline for the development 751 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator Rónán Mullen.] of the regulations or the implementation of any of the guidelines. I would support any such measures. They work to an extent but it is a bit like putting up the price of cigarettes in that, on their own, inhibiting measures do not work unless there is the necessary cultural transformation. ASH Ireland referred to the need to ban smoking in cars. I am not sure how I feel about that. While I support legislation up to a point, I believe there is a danger that we would try to achieve with law what can only really be achieved by changing the culture. Bearing in mind the privacy of family life – perhaps the family home extends into the family car – I would like to believe parents would not be smoking and that there would be very clear cultural messaging that good parenting involves trying not to smoke in the presence of one’s children and trying not to do anything that would encourage children to take up the habit or imitate their parents in this regard.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s time has concluded.

Senator Rónán Mullen: To conclude, it is important to recognise that we need a combination of sensible laws, for example, laws banning sunbeds.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s time has concluded.

Senator Rónán Mullen: That man that came before me ran riot, a Chathaoirligh. That was the problem.

An Cathaoirleach: A total of ten minutes was allowed to the two Senators. My hands are tied by the business as ordered, so I must call the next speaker. I call Senator Corrigan.

Senator Rónán Mullen: I will conclude by saying we have a duty to ensure as few people as possible are forced into a struggle against addiction and what might end up as a struggle against cancer.

Senator Maria Corrigan: I wish to share time with Senator Ormonde.

An Cathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Maria Corrigan: Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in Ireland and worldwide. In Ireland, it is responsible for 25% of deaths. Taking about cancer, sometimes referred to as “the big C”, brings on anxiety and incredible dread, yet it is a very survivable disease. The debate we are having is very welcome because it gives us an opportunity to send a message of optimism to people. Over 80% of cancers are curable and over 30% are preventable. For this to be the case, behavioural changes and responses are required on our part. This is where cancer awareness plays a key role. Awareness is the first step in bringing about attitudinal and behavioural change. Over recent years, an enormous number of education and information campaigns have been spearheaded by voluntary groups, such as the Irish Cancer Society, and Government bodies, such as the Department of Health and Children and the HSE. In the education, awareness 1o’clock and information that has been attempted to be put out lies the road to two critical steps: prevention and early detection. While not wanting to repeat what colleagues have said, when we look at what we know and at the evidence, we see that if we want to prevent cancer, there are a number of proactive and positive steps we can take. We can stop smoking, we can not smoke at all, we can improve our nutrition and we can improve our physical exercise. Smoking is attributable to 30% of all cancers and to 95% of lung cancers. 752 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

Those statistics speak for themselves as to why, if we want to prevent cancer, we should either not start to smoke in the first instance or, if we are smokers, we should cease as quickly as possible. On the campaigns we run with an aim to bringing about attitude and behavioural change, which changes are necessary if we really want to prevent the cancers, I often think of the effectiveness of environmental campaigns run with children. It is imperative that we start early. It is not only about educating the adults within our society. We must educate children. In meeting residents and constituents, often I am struck by them stating that the real trigger in bringing about attitude and behavioural change on their part when it came to recycling was the pressure they were put under when their children came home from school and insisted they segregate their waste because they were working towards their green flag. There is a really important lesson in that for us when we seek to bring about attitude and behavioural change on the part of all of our citizens. Without wanting to repeat what colleagues have said about early detection, knowing the symptoms, recognising them and going for screening is very important, but that means we need to provide education and awareness in that regard. An interesting study by the Irish Cancer Society looking at bowel cancer and to which I will merely refer showed how little information on the symptoms was available. Today is national no smoking day. Smoking must be one of the greatest menaces to stalk our health services. One should keep in mind that giving up smoking is not only about cancer prevention but also about a range of other diseases, from breathing disorders to blood pressure, heart disease, artery disease and stomach ulcers. Cancer affects not only the person who has it but all of his or her family. Excellent suggestions have been made to the Minister of State and I would urge her to consider them.

Senator Ann Ormonde: I commend the Irish Cancer Society, especially my ex-colleague who is one of the key persons in spearheading how to deal with cancer by way of an awareness campaign in terms of leaflets and reaching out to schools, hospitals and doctors. Everyone in society has a role to play, but the Irish Cancer Society has created that role for all of us to make that happen. More than ever, the big C, as it is known, is a big dread in society. However, it should not be so because it can be prevented. It is all about preventative medicine and how we create a proper diet and de-stress people in society. These are areas in which we all have a role in terms of prevention. Today is national no smoking day, and smoking is a significant factor contributing to cancer. We need to hold daffodil day and pink ribbon day and to issue leaflets. We need to keep stating that it need not be the dread of society. We will talk this down. Cancer can be cured. There are examples of people with different types of cancer and we know of significant success stories. We seem to dwell on those who are not successful, but they are a small percentage. With the Irish Cancer Society, all Members, along with those in schools, hospitals and other walks of life, should promote a prevention campaign not to be afraid of cancer. Health is the most important issue for our nation. We all have a role. I commend those participating in this awareness campaign and the Irish Cancer Society on promoting it.

Senator Phil Prendergast: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Áine Brady. I also welcome a former colleague, former Senator Kathleen O’Meara, and the team from the Irish Cancer Society who are present. I thank them for the work they do in raising awareness and thank them as well for the statistics brief they provided. As those have been well flagged already, I will not repeat them. 753 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator Phil Prendergast.]

In my former work as a midwife in the maternity services, it was always obvious to me at delivery time that a mother was a smoker. There was a great difference in the state of the placenta after delivery and we would never need to ask the women. One could tell by the state of placenta because it would be gritty and infarcted whereas a normal healthy placenta would be no such thing. These babies suffer disadvantage from the very beginning of their lives because they do not achieve their expected birth weight targets and may have difficulties with feeding. The message about smoking in pregnancy needs to be reiterated. Anything a woman does while she is pregnant will have an impact on the baby she happens to be growing in her body. There is no reason to have a disconnect in that regard. On my research, while we all were looking at the same websites, I want to focus in particular on an aspect of men’s health because prostate cancer is extremely common, colorectal cancer, while it does not only affect men, affects them in many cases, and there is also testicular cancer. I looked at the website of Mr. Des Bishop, who was a good advocate for getting information out there. As a sufferer of testicular cancer, he was a good role model. He was a visitor to the Houses because of his ability to learn Irish and speak it so eloquently, and he is a good guy. People like him would do a great deal for putting the positive side of diagnosis and how to treat particular aspects of cancer. On how obesity links into cancer and to ill-health, my colleague, Senator McFadden, and I are involved in the “Operation Transformation” television programme. The 14 Oireachtas Members between us have lost 11 stone plus in the five weeks, but it was mostly those on the other side of the House who were heavy.

Senator Nicky McFadden: The boys.

Senator Phil Prendergast: The boys, yes. We very much welcome that the restaurant here is now preparing the menus decided by the “Operation Transformation” team and Dr. Eva Orsmond. This is something Mr. Don Rice and his team have taken on board and that option will continue in the restaurant. Yesterday we had the honour of having four of the five leaders who are undergoing the programme on television at present here as our guests. They were delighted that this option was available here and they also stated that there were restaurants around Dublin which were also interested in having the reduced fat and lower calorie options available to people. There is an interest in having programmes such as this to raise awareness. Another aspect of my work involves visiting schools with the sexual health programme. I speak about cervical screening and about the HPV vaccine, which is coming on stream for young women later this year and which I very much welcome. To get the attention of young people, and the Irish Cancer Society might take this on board, we must put up one-liners on social networking sites such as Google Buzz, Bebo and Facebook with links to facts they may need to know. We certainly must be innovative in how we get young people to engage with health awareness and cancer prevention. Testicular cancer, in particular, mainly affects young men between the ages of 15 and 35 years. Young people must take proper care, be able to check themselves out and get comfortable with that process. There should be links on such pages where young people might get even one piece of information. In my experience it is often the one-liner or throwaway remark that will make a difference in people’s lives. Many people are not aware of the dangers of doing something or of signs and symptoms because what is normal for a person who is going through puberty? No two people are the same. Another aspect of my life is running junior discotheques. It is very difficult when one 754 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements meets a young girl of 12 years of age who is wearing make-up and high heels and dressed for a social outing to tell the difference between her and a 17 year old. During puberty, when the body is undergoing massive changes, normal can be a movable feast for many young people. They do not know what is normal. Rather than have people concerned about body changes, they should know what is normal for them, and the only way to achieve that is to give them information in a way they can understand and recognise. We need to move forward in planning how to get that information to young people and perhaps get greater take-up of it and more prevention as a result. Today is national no smoking day. Cigarettes now have far more addictive properties than they had previously. It is one of the means of trapping people into smoking. It is no longer simply a matter of somebody being able to have a cigarette when they are out socialising and not smoking otherwise. The addictive properties make people continue to smoke. I also support the call for legislation to monitor the use of sunbeds. The idea that people are exposing young children to sunbeds must be examined. I thank the Minister for her attendance and appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this important subject. I hope there will be positive moves on it. I also thank the Irish Cancer Society and the other speakers for their contributions to the debate.

Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin: I wish to share time with Senator Doherty.

An Cathaoirleach: That is agreed.

Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin: I welcome the Minister. This is one of the most important debates the House has had, as cancer affects so many families in our society. I welcome visitors to the Chamber on national no smoking day. As an avid non-smoker, I would encourage measures to prevent smoking. In terms of environmental health, it is crucial that we consider as many measures as possible to enhance people’s lifestyles and to minimise diseases such as cancer and the many other things caused by smoking. Cancer is a scourge. There has been a rapid increase in its incidence in Ireland. The number of people who die from cancer is increasing. Indeed, it is projected by the national cancer registry that there will be approximately 30,000 cases of cancer diagnosed in 2010 and that the figure will be 43,000 in 2020. That is an increase of 70% over the next decade. We cannot afford to sit back and allow that to happen. We must examine as many measures as possible to deal with it. Many people have spoken about education, which will be an important part of that process. I refer to the KiKK study which was produced by the radiological protection agency in Germany. It provides some startling facts. The study examined clusters of cancer incidence within a 5 km radius of nuclear power plants. It found that in children up to four years of age there was a 60% increase in the incidence of tumours within the 5 km radius of nuclear power plants compared to the national average. In the case of childhood leukaemia, there was a 118% increase around such plants. It is not conclusively proven that nuclear power plants are the cause of the cancers. There could be other factors. Unfortunately, there is a great deal we do not know about cancer; there is much we must still discover. However, there appears to be clear evidence that there is a likelihood that environmental factors play a key role in causing cancer. We must ask why it is the case that in the less technological age of the past far fewer people died of cancer. Indeed, cancer incidence is rapidly increasing; it is now the second main cause of death in this country. It will be the main cause before long. That is the trajectory we are on and we must deal with it. 755 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Senator Niall Ó Brolcháin.]

What must this country do? Having looked at the study from Germany, it was startling to discover the lack of research in this country. It is very difficult to get figures on any aspects of cancer. We need far more statistical research into particular areas and industries around which there may be clusters of cancer. We need information and to examine what is causing cancer in Ireland. Research is crucial. There is a clear link between cigarettes and cancer but it took many years to find it and, indeed, it was not accepted. At one time it was said that cigarettes were good for people. They were considered cool, wonderful and so forth. It is now widely accepted, and there have been many legal cases which demonstrate, that cigarettes cause cancer and are very harmful. However, it took many years for that to be accepted. We must examine the various different types of radiation. There is clear evidence that radiation has effects. In the case of the mobile telephone industry we must examine what might be the cancer effects. I am not making any assertions about that industry but there is clear evidence, for example, that the non-ionising radiation from mobile telephones heats up people’s heads. That might or might not cause the various increases in tumours; we do not know. However, we should adhere to the precautionary principle, look at what is coming down the line and not make the same mistake that was made with cigarettes. It is clear that cigarettes are dangerous, and there appears to be a growing body of evidence that children under the age of 16 years should be careful about the amount of time they spend using mobile telephones. There are many different aspects to cancer research but we must be clear about the environmental aspects of cancer. I will conclude by referring to a number of different services. Services for treating cancer in Ireland are rapidly improving but I urge that we examine the Finnish model as well. I attended a World Health Organisation conference in Finland a number of years ago. The Finns have a very good health model and have moved far more into prevention. A total of 30% of cancers are preventable. Finally, the pilot daffodil centre in Galway has worked out very well. Those centres should be established throughout the country. The recent investment of €7.5 million by the Minister for Health and Children in the clinical research facility in University College Hospital in Galway is very welcome. In addition, the centres of excellence and the work of the Government in that regard are very important.

Senator Pearse Doherty: Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir Ó Brolcháin faoi a chuid ama a roinnt liom. It has been said many times that cancer has no boundaries and today in the Seanad we see that it does not respect political boundaries. We all agree that work on cancer must continue in terms of promoting awareness and delivering best practice services to people who have unfortunately contracted different forms of cancer. Today’s statements follow the launch of daffodil day, when the Irish Cancer Society announced its expansion of cancer information services. I commend the society and welcome the initiative of setting up daffodil centres in a range of hospitals nationwide, including designated care services. Mr. John McCormack, CEO of the Irish Cancer Society, has said the largest gap in the delivery of cancer information is from the point of diagnosis within the hospital to providing a link with the support centres and groups in the community, thus enabling a continuous system of care and patient progress. It is important to recognise the society’s achievements and the work it is doing. I refer to Sligo General Hospital which provided cancer services until late last year when they were moved to a centre in Galway. I raise a minor but very important point, namely, the two commitments entered into by the Government to patients as a result of the withdrawal of services. The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney, promised campaigners and patients that a bus service would be made available to patients to enable them to travel 756 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements for treatment. That service never materialised. As a consequence, patients are using the old bus service which is unsuitable for transporting people who are sick. A promise was made which has since been reneged on that follow-up services would be provided in Sligo but they are being provided in the BreastCheck clinic which is unsuitable for recovering patients. Will the Minister of State ensure the Government will live up to the commitments given to cancer sufferers and campaigners?

Senator Nicky McFadden: I thank the Minister of State for her indulgence. I raise the issue of screening for women under 50 years of age. While I accept research tells us the disease affects older people, I have serious concerns about women under 50 years of age. This morning Dr. Juliet McAleese and Professor Arnold Hill debated the issue succinctly on “Today with Pat Kenny”. I raised it yesterday on the Adjournment and was told that the debate was ongoing. I do not accept that there is not a major need for cancer screening for those under 50 years of age. It is an issue which has affected me in my personal life. A number of my friends and acquaintances, members of my family and constituents in their 40s have been diagnosed with cancer. It is an outrage that one must show symptoms or be in an at-risk category before one can be screened. It is not right that one cannot have a mammogram without being referred by a doctor. It took ten years to roll out BreastCheck, a fantastic service. The service was only made available in Waterford last year. Why can we not extend it to women in their 40s? In providing a walk-in BreastCheck service for one hour in a particular area, women could make an appointment and undergo a routine check. If one is worried about breast cancer, one should be able to be screened without having to go through the rigmarole of having to pay a general practitioner to get a letter of referral. Screening is becoming a money-making racket. If we can do anything, we should extend breast cancer screening to women under 50 years of age. The statistics are frightening. In 2007, 455 of the 600 women under 50 years of age diagnosed with breast cancer were in their 40s. I have experience of this in my close circle. I worked in a doctor’s surgery and the number of women in their 40s who presented with breast cancer was staggering. I looked at a website and the information available for young women with breast cancer was trite. Women are in the prime of their lives in their 40s. They are rearing their children and looking after their aged parents. They are very important, socially and economi- cally, to society. As we have said time and again, early detection is the only way we will be able to increase survival rates for women with breast cancer.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Áine Brady): I thank Senators for their positive contributions and many suggestions which I will take on board. This debate about cancer awareness on National No Smoking Day is timely. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in Ireland. Therefore, giving up smoking is one of the most, if not the most, important actions people can take to protect their health and reduce their risk of developing cancer and other serious illnesses. This debate presents an opportunity to reiterate that message. Cancer awareness means being aware of what we can do to reduce our risk of developing cancer. It also means being aware of the signs and symptoms of cancer and seeking medical advice promptly. As many have said, prevention and early detection are central to the fight against cancer. In this regard, various charities play a very important role in society. They do this by raising awareness through various high profile campaigns such as the ongoing Marie Keating Foundation’s breast cancer awareness campaign or the Irish Cancer Society’s recent lung cancer awareness campaign. Such organisations play a pivotal role in providing up-to-date 757 Cancer Awareness: 17 February 2010. Statements

[Deputy Áine Brady.] and accurate information and advice. These charities, with others such as Europa Donna, are to be commended for their efforts. Cancer is a great burden on Irish and European society. Most people, at some stage in their lives, will be affected by it as a result of the diagnosis of a friend or family member with cancer or because they will become one of the 23,000 people diagnosed with invasive cancer each year in Ireland. However, there are many positives in cancer care. It is important to note that cancer has become a disease which people can expect to survive. The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney, has made it a priority to work towards the continuing improvement of cancer services. In recent years she has allocated considerable resources to cancer services and screening. With regard to services for those diagnosed with cancer, more than €56 million in development moneys has been provided for cancer programmes since 2007 to enhance and reorganise cancer services. The fact that an additional €20 million has been provided for cancer control measures this year, despite the difficult economic position, demonstrates the priority the Government accords to cancer services. The funding will be used for the development of a number of services, including those dealing with rectal cancer and brain tumours, and the further development of lung and prostate cancer services. With regard to screening, BreastCheck and CervicalCheck are now national programmes. I strongly urge those eligible to avail of screening and respond to the invitations issued. The Minister also announced in January that work would commence on the introduction of two important screening and preventive programmes, namely, the HPV vaccination programme and the new colorectal cancer screening programme. Both programmes have been shown, through a health technology assessment by HIQA, to be cost effective and the decision to move ahead with them this year represents very good news. I take the opportunity to remind people that screening programmes are aimed at those who do not have symptoms. Anyone who is concerned about his or her health should attend a GP who will refer him or her on, as appropriate. As has been said, it is important not to delay as early detection can significantly improve outcomes. Senator Fitzgerald referred to waiting times. Those waiting for a colonoscopy are mainly non-urgent cases. In almost all cases urgent cases are being seen within four weeks. Last year the Minister introduced a target of 100% of urgent cases being seen within four weeks. Colorec- tal screening will be provided in ten to 12 centres around the country. Senator O’Malley questioned the treatment of cancer in cancer care centres. Diagnosis is made by a multidisciplinary team and treatment provided based on clinical need. A major aim of the cancer programme was to provide an equitable system of diagnosis and care, regardless of where a person lived. Many Senators referred to the use of sunbeds. The Minister intends to introduce legislation to ban the use of sunbeds by young people under 18 years of age. I urge her to prioritise such legislation. The issue of placing pictorial adverts on cigarette packets was mentioned. This is provided for under the Tobacco Control Act. The regulations are being drafted with the assistance of the Attorney General. Senator Ó Brolcháin referred to the National Cancer Registry which plays a key role in the examination of data and research. Its director, Dr. Harry Comber, is chairman of the scientific committee of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Some €170,000 in lottery funding was provided for the Sligo bus service in late 2008. 758 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

Regarding the HPV vaccination programme, in mid-January the Minister for Health and Children announced her decision to commence vaccination of girls in first year. Additional funding has been made available to the HSE to allow the programme under which 30,000 girls will receive three doses of the vaccine each year to be delivered as announced. The HSE is working closely with the Department of Health and Children to finalise the plan and the necessary arrangements which must be put in place to allow the programme to commence before the summer. Staff in the HSE who will carry out the HPV vaccination programme are completing the swine flu vaccination programme and also vaccinating additional school-age children with the MMR vaccine. This latter requirement arises because swine flu vaccination necessitated a delay in the MMR vaccination programme in certain areas and from the fact that in recent weeks there has been a significant rise in the number of measles cases, especially among the Traveller population. Each of these vaccination requirements is being considered. There is significant potential in the delivery of the vaccine, namely, in the prospect of it being delivered by nurses and at the same time as other vaccines provided for children in the school setting. Both developments will offset the impact on resources required for the programme and any possible impact on other services provided by these staff. These specific aspects form part of the details being finalised by the HSE. Yesterday the Department of Health and Children received a document from the HSE outlining a number of options for implementation of the HPV vaccination programme. An agreed plan, based on the commitments given by the Mini- ster, will be finalised shortly. Senator McFadden made a point about lowering the age group for mammography screening. There is limited evidence for the efficacy of screening women aged 40 to 49 years in reducing mortality from breast cancer. It is fair to say services for the detection and treatment of cancer have never been better. As stated, up to one third of cancers may be preventable. It is true that healthy lifestyles do not guarantee continuing good health but, especially on National No Smoking Day, it is important to bear in mind that a significant impact on the incidence of cancer could be made by individuals making a change in personal lifestyle that would reduce their risk of developing cancer.

An Cathaoirleach: I thank the Minister of State.

Sitting suspended at 1.35 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Order for Second Stage.

Bill entitled an Act to amend the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006; to amend the Defence Act 1954; and to provide for related matters.

Senator Denis O’Donovan: I move: “That Second Stage be taken now.”

Question put and agreed to.

Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Second Stage.

Question proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy John Moloney): I am pleased to initiate the Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010 in the Upper House. In view of the reputation of this House for a strong interest in promoting the rights of the individual, I look forward to a high quality debate on the Bill, which has at its core the protection of such rights. 759 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy John Moloney.]

The purpose of the Bill is to make limited amendments to the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006. The 2006 Act was a significant milestone in establishing a new statutory regime governing the way the criminal law deals with mentally ill persons who may have committed criminal acts. The Bill provides for amendments to two aspects of the 2006 Act. The provisions concerned are section 4 of the Act, which deals with the cases of persons who, because of mental disorder, may be considered by a court to be unfit to be tried on criminal charges, and section 13, which provides for review of detention by the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board. The review board was established by the 2006 Act as a new independent body to review the detention of persons detained in accordance with the Act. Section 13 provides that the review board should carry out regular reviews of persons who have been found to be unfit to be tried or not guilty by reason of insanity and who are detained by order of a court in a designated centre. The only designated centre at present is the Central Mental Hospital. The review board has the power to discharge persons from detention conditionally or unconditionally in certain circumstances. In this regard it must hear evidence relating to the mental condition of the person concerned from the consultant psychiatrist responsible for the person’s care or treatment. It also must take into account the welfare and safety of that person and the public interest. The main amendment to the 2006 Act concerns section 13. It arises from the fact that the review board, since its establishment, has been reluctant to order the discharge of patients who might be considered suitable for discharge subject to conditions because it has no statutory power effectively to enforce such conditions. This has resulted in difficulties, not only for the patients concerned, but also for the Central Mental Hospital, whose limited capacity is being used up by the retention of patients who might otherwise be considered for conditional discharge under the Act. The review board’s view is that it should be possible under the Act to provide for enforceable conditions to be applied to conditional discharge to facilitate the effective use of such discharge. The 2006 Act envisaged a relatively black and white situation where a person either required inpatient treatment or the person was completely cured. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform accepts there is a category of patient who is suitable to live outside a designated centre but where, at least initially, safety and health considerations require an ability to return that person for inpatient treatment in a designated centre if there is any unforeseen deterioration in the person’s mental condition. Accordingly, this Bill provides that supervisory powers should be given to the review board to cover cases where a patient may still be suffering from an underlying mental disorder but whom it is considered safe to discharge, provided he or she complies with certain conditions. I might mention the 2008 judgment in the case of B v. Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board and others. In that case, the High Court ruled on a case taken by a person who was denied conditional discharge by the review board because it was of the view that it should only discharge the person if it had the power to impose enforceable conditions. The court agreed that the 2006 Act did not provide for enforceable conditions but held that the review board acted lawfully in refusing to discharge the patient. The case is currently under appeal to the Supreme Court. In addition, I am aware that another patient in the Central Mental Hospital, in a similar case, has made an application to the High Court under Article 40 of the Constitution. A certain urgency attaches to the proposed amendment as a number of persons who might otherwise be considered for conditional discharge are not being so considered. The Central Mental Hospital must keep them, even if they are suitable for conditional discharge and even though it is under pressure for bed space.

760 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

The opportunity is also being taken to amend section 4 of the 2006 Act which allows a court to commit a person who may be unfit to be tried on a criminal charge to the Central Mental Hospital for an initial period of up to 14 days for the purposes of psychiatric examination. The main concern being addressed in the Bill is that the present arrangements may not be fully compliant with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights which has been given further effect in our law since 31 December 2003 in accordance with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003. To ensure such compliance, it is necessary to provide that a committal for examination can only be made by a court after hearing evidence from a consultant psychiatrist. Some additional improvements are also being made to section 4 which I will explain as I go through the detail of the Bill. I will now outline the main provisions of the Bill. Sections 1, 2 and 4 are technical drafting sections. Section 3 amends section 4 of the 2006 Act. As I noted, section 4 is concerned with the procedures for dealing with a person who may have a mental disorder and thus be legally unfit to be tried on a criminal charge. In the absence of prior medical evidence on the issue, a court may commit the person for a period of not more than 14 days to a designated centre for psychiatric examination. This is so that the court can decide on foot of that examination whether the mental disorder, if it is present, renders the person unable to understand the nature or course of the proceedings on one or other of the several grounds set out in the Act. This initial referral may be made at present by the court without recourse to medical advice. It is proposed in section 3, in the light of detailed consideration of obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights in this area and the advice of the Attorney General, to provide that a court shall consider the evidence of an approved medical officer as to the person’s mental condition before it decides to make an order to commit a person for examination at a designated centre. At present any examination has to take place on an inpatient basis. However, in the amendment proposed to be made by section 3 of the Bill, the court will be able to order that the examination be made on an inpatient or outpatient basis. In providing for this amendment to section 4 the opportunity is also being taken to provide that the court may take account of the evidence of an approved medical officer to assist in determining the issue of fitness to be tried and also to facilitate an adjournment to allow the person to receive appropriate medical treatment. The latter should help to prevent unnecessary referrals to the Central Mental Hospital and give statutory recognition to informal diversion arrangements which I understand operate successfully at Cloverhill District Court. There is a further matter which warrants consideration, namely, the possibility that centres other than the Central Mental Hospital could be designated for the purpose of carrying out examinations in accordance with section 4. This would ensure the Central Mental Hospital was not used for cases which could be dealt with in community hospitals. Accordingly, this option is being considered further in consultation with the Minister for Health and Children. In view of the relative urgency of the Bill, it was not possible to conclude consideration of this matter before publication of the Bill, but the possibility of bringing forward a Committee Stage amendment to this effect is being considered. Turning to the provisions relating to conditional discharge, the first amendment relevant to this issue occurs in section 5 which amends section 11 of the 2006 Act to provide that the criteria to which the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board must have regard in reviewing detention will also apply to reviews of the conditions of a person’s conditional discharge and to applications for unconditional discharge from persons who have been conditionally discharged. The criteria are the welfare and safety of the person concerned and the public interest.

761 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy John Moloney.]

Sections 6 and 7 amend the 2006 Act to provide for enforceable conditions to attach to an order by the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board for conditional discharge. The provisions provide for a comprehensive system in regard to the imposition of conditions, arrangements for supervision of the conditionally discharged person, provisions to facilitate variation of conditions, provision for the conditionally discharged person to be considered for unconditional discharge and arrangements for the return of the person to the Central Mental Hospital where there is a material breach of the conditional discharge. Importantly, provision is also made for the review of the detention of a person returned under these provisions to the Central Mental Hospital by the Mental Health (Criminal Law ) Review Board. Section 6 also amends section 13 of the 2006 Act to provide that the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board can conditionally discharge patients under the new section 13A. Section 7 inserts three new sections — 13A, 13B and 13C — in the 2006 Act. Section 13A creates a new scheme of conditional discharge. Subsection (1) provides that the Criminal Law (Mental Health) Review Board may make an order for the discharge of a patient subject to conditions, including conditions relating to outpatient treatment or supervision, or both. Subsection (2) provides that the review board may only make a conditional discharge order where the arrangements in regard to a discharge considered necessary by the clinical director of the designated centre have been made. These include arrangements for facilitating compliance by the person with the conditions, the supervision of the person and providing for the person’s return under section 13B if he or she fails to abide by the conditions. Subsection (3) provides that the conditions must be communicated in writing to the person. The effect of the order and consequences of non-compliance with the conditions must be explained to the person. Subsection (4) requires the person to comply with the conditional discharge order. Subsection (5) requires a copy of the order to be sent to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the clinical director of the designated centre. Subsection (6) provides that the review board may vary or remove one or more of the conditions of the conditional discharge order, or impose further conditions, on application by the person or the clinical director. Subsection (7) requires notice of an application under subsection (6) to be given to the person and the clinical director where the application is not being made by the clinical director. Subsection (8) provides that the person may apply to the review board for unconditional discharge after 12 months from the date of conditional discharge. The person may make subsequent applications, if necessary, so long as a period of at least 12 months elapses between applications. Subsection (9) sets out the procedure for dealing with an application for unconditional discharge. Section 13B sets out the procedures that apply where a person is in material breach of a conditional discharge order. Subsection (1) provides that a person who is in material breach of a conditional discharge order will be deemed to be unlawfully at large. Subsection (2) provides that a person is in material breach of his or her conditional discharge order where the clinical director of the designated centre, on reasonable grounds, believes the person is in breach of one or more conditions of his or her conditional discharge and that there is a serious likelihood of the person causing serious harm to himself or herself or others, or that the person may be in need of inpatient care or treatment. Subsection (3) requires the clinical director to inform a person believed to be in material breach of a conditional discharge order in writing of this fact and the reasons for such belief. 762 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

Subsection (4) provides that subsection (3) does not apply where the material breach is such as to give reasonable cause for the clinical director to believe there is a serious likelihood of the person causing immediate and serious harm to himself or herself or others. Subsection (5) provides that the clinical director may make arrangements to effect the person’s return to the designated centre, including requesting assistance from the Garda Síochána. Subsection (6) provides for Garda powers of entry and arrest for the purposes of section 13B. Subsection (7) provides that a returned person must be given reasons in writing for his or her return. The provisions of the Act of 2006 will once more apply to the returned person, as they did when the person was originally committed to the designated centre under the Act of 2006 or the relevant provisions of the Defence Act 1954. Subsection (8) provides that the clinical director must inform the review board of the return of the person and the review board must review the detention of the person as soon as may be. Subsection (9) provides a definition of the term “authorised person”, which is relevant to the provision made by the new section 13C for externally provided assisted returns. The new section 13C is a technical provision to ensure staff of private agencies hired to effect the return of patients to the designated centre can be considered authorised persons for the purpose of section 13B. This provision mirrors an amendment made to the Mental Health Act 2001 to take account of legal difficulties in the operation of return procedures. Section 8 corrects a drafting error in Schedule 2 to the 2006 Act. Section 9 provides for consequential amendments to the Defence Act 1954. Section 10 provides for the Short Title of the Act and its com- mencement. This is a relatively short Bill, the provisions of which are limited and are intended to ensure the difficulties I have mentioned can be corrected as quickly as possible. It is not in any way a Bill which represents a full review of the operation of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006. I understand the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, plans to have such a review commenced in his Department subsequent to the enactment of this Bill. This Bill needs to be enacted as soon as possible to correct the difficulties mentioned. Accordingly, it is of necessity confined in its amendments to ensure it can be considered as quickly as possible by the Oireachtas. I look forward to hearing Senators’ views on the Bill. I commend the Bill to the House.

Senator Eugene Regan: I welcome the introduction of this Bill and thank the Minister of State for presenting it to the House today. The Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010 deals with two amendments to the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, namely, the fitness to be tried mechanism introduced in the 2006 Act and the lacuna in the law identified in a series of High Court cases. It is important and urgent that we address these matters. On the first issue in terms of fitness to be tried, the Bill deals with issues identified in the Irish courts and, in particular, the European Court of Human Rights in regard to the need for the accused to be able to participate in the trial of the action. Article 6.1 of the European Convention on Human Rights provides for the right of a fair hearing in respect of a criminal charge and Article 6.3 sets out the various minimum rights for anyone charged with a criminal offence. An example is the Stanford v. United Kingdom where the applicant claimed he had not received a fair trial as he was unable to hear the proceedings. The T&V v. United Kingdom, the Thompson and Venables, case also raises this type of issue. The Bill deals with the question of fitness to stand trial and with the issue of specialised medical evidence to be brought to bear in all cases resulting in psychiatric detention and for some time to determine the issue of fitness to stand trial, which should not be determined peremptorily without the ability of the parties to bring evidence to the court, in particular 763 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Eugene Regan.] psychiatric evidence. The second major element is that of conditional discharge, a matter of certain urgency, in that the review board’s directions do not have binding force under the current legislation. While the board has been operational for two years and has the power to make recommendations in terms of future care, in particular in an out-patient capacity, it does not have the power to make these recommendations binding. The judgment of Mr. Justice Hanna in the J.B. v. The Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board highlighted the problem that can arise in this type of case. I welcome that the Bill addresses this problem in sections 6 and 7. Section 6, which provides that any conditions imposed by the board, whether for further detention, care or treatment in a designated centre or for post-discharge supervision, will hence- forth be binding, deals with that anomaly. Section 7 deals with the specific point raised by Mr. Justice Hanna in regard to conditional discharge orders being tailored to the requirements of the patient. I welcome the Bill, the passage of which will receive the support of Fine Gael.

Senator Denis O’Donovan: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and compliment him on the significant and magnificent work he is doing in the area of mental health. I support the Bill. The Minister of State through his portfolio has taken brave and strident steps in the area of mental health, in particular through the programme, A Vision for Change, which is magnificent and bold. All manner of road blocks have for decades, if not a century, been put in the way of changes in legislation and the attitude of the Irish psyche in regard to mental health. When I was studying law, some of the legislation in the area of mental health was based on the Victorian age. We have come a long way since then. I understand from the Minister of State, having spoken recently to him about the important psychiatric wing at Bantry General Hospital, that he hopes to announce publicly in the Dáil his programme in regard to A Vision for Change. I await with awe this brave and bold programme. What the Minister of State is setting out to achieve is what many experts, 3o’clock psychologists, psychiatrists and legal experts have been talking about for the past 30 to 50 years. I wish him well with his programme. I have no doubt the current Government is committed to supporting this programme financially. Although the Minister of State may be criticised about the changes introduced in this area, the end will justify the means. The Minister of State has publicly pronounced that the Taoiseach and Cabinet are committed to providing financial support for his programme which will be effected during the next number of years. This is a major step for the Minister of State. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge and compliment the Minister of State’s work in this area which has been single-handed from a political point of view While we sometimes lock horns politically, I welcome the positive remarks made by my colleague, Senator Regan, in broadly supporting the Bill. The legislation deals with two distinct and unrelated areas. It substantially alters the fitness to be tried mechanism introduced by the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, which was a bold step on the part of the previous Govern- ment, and it addresses a legislative lacuna identified by the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board through a series of High Court cases. These are problems which could not have been envisaged. It is important the Minister of State and Legislature recognise particular decisions made in the higher courts of this land. In this regard, the Bill provides that the board can impose binding conditions on patients it proposes to release on conditional discharge from the Central Mental Hospital in Dundrum. There is no doubt there are a number of patients in the Central Mental Hospital who could be released conditionally if assessed by the director of mental health or a top-level clinician. We are always talking about beds in various hospitals. In that context, the freeing up of six or ten beds in the Central Mental Hospital would be a major step, as it would allow people on a 764 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage waiting list perhaps to gain access. That would be a critical step and one that must be lauded. However, I add a rider that any such patients should only be released after the most stringent examination by the top clinicians in the hospital and on condition they would not become involved with drugs or alcohol. They might have to follow a programme of diligence such as that provided by Alcoholics Anonymous or a drug rehabilitation scheme. I am satisfied the necessary steps would be taken in that regard. The Bill deals with the substantial issue of a person’s fitness to be tried. In certain high profile cases, including murder cases, somebody might be deemed to be unfit by the court to be tried on the grounds of mental incapacity or because of illness, being unable to have cogni- sance of or regard to what is happening in court. The Bill also revisits the mechanism whereby individuals who have been found not guilty by reason of insanity or who are unfit to be tried are to be conditionally discharged. The Bill does not deal with persons who have been placed in psychiatric care through civilian mechanisms. It is important to note that it does not interfere with that particular provision. The principal themes of the Bill include improving the fitness to be tried mechanism to bring it into compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights, something which must be acknowledged and providing for the first time that discharge and post-release conditions imposed on persons by the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board will be legally enforceable. These conditions will apply both to those who have been found unfit to stand trial and who have been found not guilty by reason of insanity. Section 10 provides that the Bill shall take effect on such a day or days as appointed by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I trust that this will be sooner rather than later. There is a plethora of other minor amendments made in the Bill. If it is appropriate, perhaps the Minister of State might give a flavour of the workings, including the successes and pitfalls, of the review board, a relatively new body, in which I have a particular interest. A political colleague of mine who is well known to the Minister has asked me to raise this point. Sometimes when such boards are established, there is a view that many of them are quangos. Unfortu- nately, the political system carries that historical baggage. I remind the House, however, that this is a most important board. Many of those serving on it are legal and health experts, including clinical psychologists and psychiatrists. I am subject to the Minister of State’s views but is there an obligation on the board, annually or bi-annually, to lay before the Houses of the Oireachtas a confidential report on its workings and how it deals with issues? Has this matter been considered and, if not, will it be examined in the future? Common law presumes that, unless the contrary is proved, everybody above the age of capacity is sane and responsible for his or her actions. The idea of fitness to stand trial refers not to an individual’s capacity at the time of the alleged offence, but rather to the state of mind that the law regards as adequate to permit a satisfactory level of participation in the trial process. It should be noted that fitness to stand trial is a mixed medico-legal term which extends to mental states that in some cases fall far short of commonly accepted notions of normality. It is important to note the difference. In a criminal trial the concept distinguishes between the accused’s state of mind at the time of the criminal act — be it rape, murder or manslaughter — and his or her mental capacity a year or two later when facing trial. As these can often alter or deteriorate, the distinction should be noted. Section 4 of the 2006 Act contains a non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered when the fitness to stand trial of an individual is in question. It includes whether the individual is pre- cluded by reason of mental disorder from pleading to the charge, in other words, does he or she understand and can he or she plead guilty or not guilty in answer to the question inevitably 765 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Denis O’Donovan.] put to the accused? In addition, is the individual capable of instructing a legal representative? That is, obviously, a major shortcoming in the 2006 Act. In the case of an indictable offence which may be tried summarily, can the individual elect for trial by jury? We take a lot of this for granted, but it is very important. Historically, in some instances, great prudence was not taken by trial judges in dealing with mentally ill persons. This was the case in directing a person who might have committed a heinous crime but who to the lay person might have appeared capable with full mens rea. However, a medical expert might not have been in a position to decide whether the accused wanted to be tried by judge and jury or to plead guilty or not guilty. In the past 20 years the courts have become more wary of becoming engaged in determining an accused person’s mental fitness. It is unusual that less than four years after the 2006 Act became law, the House is considering amendments to it, albeit valid ones. The catalysts for the two major amendments proposed are High Court decisions, to which we must have regard. Section 4 of the 2006 Act also deals with determining the mental character of an accused person who, in the case of a trial by jury, may wish to challenge a proposed juror to whom he or she objects. Unfortunately, this happens too regularly in some serious, high profile criminal trials. If a proposed juror dresses in or looks the wrong way, he or she can be challenged by subtle and able people. The other point made about the Act concerns the understanding of evidence, which is also important. The Bill must be welcomed. It is sensible. The Minister of State said the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform intends to introduce substantive legislation in the area of criminal law dealing with mental illness and insanity, which is welcome. I admire the tremendous strides the Minister of State has made in this area. He represents a breath of fresh air to his Depart- ment. I wish him ongoing success. I have no doubt that between now and the general election in June 2012, which will not be long coming, he will have concluded many of his plans and they will have been implemented.

Senator Ivana Bacik: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and apologise for not having been present for the entire debate as I was attending two joint committee meetings. On behalf of the Labour Party, I welcome the Bill which makes some sensible amendments. I would like to see some further amendments which I shall outline shortly. The Minister of State stated the Bill does not represent “a full review of the operation of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006”, and clearly it does not constitute a full review of that Act. However, I am glad the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform plans on having a full review once this Bill has been enacted. I did some research on the 2006 Act and spoke on it a number of years ago in Trinity College at a conference on evidence-based mental health services for Ireland. I was very fortunate to hear from psychiatrists and medical practitioners who have a very different perspective to offer on this Act and also on the Mental Health Act 2001, which came into force on 1 November 2006. The implication of those Acts has been a welcome change in the focus of our mental health services. We have moved towards a more rights-based approach, which I very much welcome. I wish to quote Dr. Anne Marie O’Neill, who has written one of the leading texts on Irish mental health law, who pointed out:

[T]he philosophy of the law has progressed significantly from the days of incarceration and control of “lunatics” as a matter of public order when the issue of rights was considered anathema in the light of the “problem” to be solved. It has moved from this stage to a welfare 766 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

philosophy where the state’s intervention was perceived as benign and as in the interests of the welfare of the person with mental illness so that the issue of rights was considered irrelevant. Now it is faced with a new challenge: that of acknowledging that the recognition of the rights of the person with mental illness is an essential ingredient of the ethical carer/patient relationship.

Moving away from that incarceration model to the welfare model, we still have not moved fully to the recognition of the rights of persons with mental illness. However, we are moving that way and the Bill represents a step in that direction. I shall make a few more general points before talking more particularly about the amendments in the Bill. At a general level, we have always seen in the criminal law — I speak as a practising criminal barrister — an uneasy relationship between the criminal justice system and the area of medical, psychiatric and psychological sciences. The criminal law is of particular relevance because there has been a relatively frequent occurrence of cases in which crimes have been committed by persons with mental disorders, often by reason of those mental disorders, as a result of which they may not have been able to form a requisite intent for a crime or they may not have had the capacity to understand the criminal justice process. In the criminal justice system we have wrestled with the difficulty of accommodating recognition of persons with mental illness. It is a matter of shame that so many persons with mental illness continue to be incarcerated in our prisons when in fact they require medical treatment. We have seen the development of a defence of insanity at common law and very overdue reforms of that in the 2006 Act. However, although the 2006 Act is clearly more enlightened than the legislation that previously governed this area, it is most unfortunate that the 2006 Act and the Bill before us continue to use the judgmental and outmoded word “insanity” in the title, especially as our mental health legislation and our psychiatric services would no longer use that language. There is a corollary, which is that the relationship between the 2006 Act and the Mental Health Act 2001 remains somewhat unclear. In particular, different definitions of mental disorder are used in both. The 2001 Act, which governs the civil law aspects of voluntary and involuntary detention in psychiatric institutions, deals with a narrower definition of mental disorder as being a psychiatric disorder necessitating treatment, whereas the 2006 Act covers a much broader definition of mental disorder, governing persons who would not in the psychiatric sciences be regarded as suffering from psychiatric illness at all. To some extent there are inevitable differences between the definitions on the mental health side and the criminal justice side, which is unfortunate. Dr. Simon Mills, who has written extensively on the subject, said that retaining these two very different categories of so-called insanity or mental disorder may lead to difficulties. One of the difficulties is now being acknowledged in the Bill, which is that a person may be discharged from psychiatric care but subject to certain conditions. This was a major flaw in the 2006 Bill. I wish to move to consider the first key reform in the Bill, which I welcome. It is the reform that will allow enforceable conditions to be applied to conditional discharge. As the Minister of State has said, the 2006 Act envisaged a rather black and white situation. Either the person required inpatient treatment or was completely cured. That neglected or ignored the reality in psychiatric care where there might well be persons who are capable of some sort of conditional discharge. I very much welcome the amendments to section 13 of the 2006 Act contained in sections 6 and 7 of the Bill which will allow conditional discharge subject to enforceable conditions. That will allow persons to be discharged. I note that the Minister of State has stated that there is a certain urgency attached to this in that persons are currently being detained when they should, if the law allowed it, be considered for conditional discharge. That is a very 767 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Ivana Bacik.] serious matter and I know there is litigation on it. I welcome those amendments and the conditional discharge principle is important. The second important reform in the Bill is the one which I say does not go far enough. In his speech the Minister of State acknowledged that further amendments could be made. I refer to the amendment of section 4 of the 2006 Act contained in section 3 of the Bill relating to what was called the fitness to plead procedure. The procedure in section 4 of the 2006 Act used fitness to be tried to replace the old common law idea of fitness to plead. That change, allowing the judge to decide on the issue of fitness to be tried, was a very welcome reform. However, there were problems in the 2006 Act which are recognised in the Bill. Its failure to provide for medical evidence to be given to the judge was a difficulty. Section 4 represented a serious improvement on what had been the case prior to 2006. Previously when a person was found unfit to plead — the old language — the judge had power to direct his or her indefinite detention in the Central Mental Hospital. Professor Dermot Walsh, a leading writer on criminal justice matters, had queried the constitutionality of this power and its compatibility with European convention. While section 4 represented a major change, section 3 of the Bill makes important further reforms in that a judge will now hear medical evidence in making the decision. The court can decide on foot of a psychiatric examination whether the mental disorder, if present, renders the person unable to understand the nature or course of proceedings, which is very important. I note the Minister of State said he undertook “detailed consideration of obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights in this area and the advice of the Attorney General”. I am glad the examination may be made on an inpatient or outpatient basis. However, the amendment overlooks the fact that a number of the fitness to be tried proceedings are still being tried in the District Court and relate to summary offences, that is, minor offences. However, the Central Mental Hospital remains the only approved centre. The Mini- ster of State has said he wants to consider the possibility that centres other than the Central Mental Hospital could be designated for the purpose of carrying out examinations in accordance with section 4, and I believe amendment should be made to the Bill at this stage. I am grateful to hear the Minister of State say he possibly wants to table an amendment on Commit- tee Stage, and I hope he does that in this House. It would be very useful to have this debated in full both in this House and in the Dáil. This is something I was going to raise, in any event, so I am glad the Minister of State has stated that. It would clearly be helpful to allow courts to send someone to any approved centre rather than just the designated one, the Central Mental Hospital, since the majority of cases at District Court level are minor. They have to be minor to be in the District Court, but it is inappropriate in many of these cases to send them to the Central Mental Hospital. I am conscious there is a traditional review currently before the courts challenging committal to the Central Mental Hospital under the existing procedure. I do not believe the Minister of State mentioned the point as regards who the medical evidence is sought from where the judge is seeking to make a decision on fitness to be tried. Has he considered providing that medical evidence should be sought from the admitting hospital? Currently, that is from the Central Mental Hospital, but if he were to expand the category of designated centres, it could be from any of the designated hospitals. This would be an appropriate measure to insert in the Bill because it would provide a judge with a fuller picture in terms of where he or she was proposing to send the person. It would give a medical opinion from a different perspective and that, perhaps, would be a useful provision. I should like to hear the Minister of State’s view and to whether he has considered that. There are other issues which relate more broadly to the manner in which we treat persons with mental illness. The issue as regards the perspective we are bringing to bear on persons 768 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage with mental health difficulties is vitally important. We have not, as yet, moved fully away from that welfare model, where as Anne-Marie O’Neill has said, we are regarding the State’s intervention as always benign. We may recognise, in practice, in many individual cases that the State’s intervention has not been benign. Our changing legislation, not just in the criminal justice area but in the Mental Health Act as well, reflects our growing awareness of the failure by the State to be benign in all cases where it has intervened in respect of persons with mental illness. We have a very shameful history of incarcerating large numbers of the population in industrial schools for children, Magdalen institutions for women and indeed in psychiatric institutions for persons deemed to have been mentally unwell. It is very much a positive development that we no longer adhere to that policy of incarceration, but there are some very chilling figures as regards the numbers that have been incarcerated in past decades. Colleagues in criminology in UCD and UCC have done a great deal of research on the large proportion of the Irish population that was detained in different institutions for so many decades. This is very interesting because for many years, we who as criminologists took a narrow view and looked at prisons, were congratulating ourselves that in Ireland a very low number of persons per thousand of the population were being detained in prisons. The true picture, however, is that we were detaining far more people in psychiatric institutions, Magdalen homes and industrial schools than was the case in other countries. Happily, we have moved away from the incarceration model and viewing State intervention as benign in all such cases. However, we still have to move to a fully rights based approach. To explain what I mean by that I want to refer to Gerard Quinn’s writing. He is a well- respected academic from NUI Galway, with an international reputation in the area of disability rights and law. He writes:

The human rights paradigm enables us to see more clearly the reality of the lives of people with mental disability. Viewing the issue of legal competence as a human rights issue centres the rights and abilities of the individual with mental disability in the determination, notwith- standing his or her difficulty or disabilities, in personally exercising those rights. The reality is that mental disability complicates but does not ruin human existence. Our law has yet to match this reality.

As he says, our law has yet to match the reality that mental disability should not always be seen as a problem. If we see legal competence, for example, in the fitness to be tried area, as a human rights issue, then we place the rights and abilities of the person who is potentially on trial at the forefront. If we look at it from his or her viewpoint, we then start to see, for example, the merit in a judge having access to a fuller picture of mental health when making a decision on fitness to be tried. I ask the Minister of State to take on board what I have said in relation to the expansion of the categories of designated centres beyond the Central Mental Hospital and to consider, in particular, how the Bill will impact upon cases in the District Court. These are often over- looked, but in fact they form the vast majority of criminal cases and also deal only with minor offences. Where minor offences are at issue, then using the Central Mental Hospital as the only centre is akin to using a sledge-hammer to crack a nut. That is a completely wrong analogy to use, but effectively it is using a far too extreme institution, one that should not be used in respect of persons found not guilty by reason of insanity, for example, in respect of minor offences. This is very much a Bill that is to be welcomed, but there are some aspects in which it could go further, particularly as regards the amendments to the fitness to stand trial procedure.

769 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

Senator Dan Boyle: The amendment of sections 4 and 13 of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 through this Bill is a welcome reform. As regards section 4, in particular, any doubt as to whether we are compliant with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights needs to be removed. I am sure everyone in the House will see this as a progressive reform. I note what has been said by Senator Bacik, and the Minister of State has indicated that there will possibly be further amendments to that section to remove that doubt even further. The introduction of the new plea, “not guilty by reason of insanity” to replace the existing “guilty but insane” and a new plea, “guilty but with diminished responsibility” go some way towards removing uncertainty in this area as well. Language can be pejorative, and much of the legislation that governed both mental health and areas of justice affecting mental health until very recently was based on 19th century legislation where terms such as “idiots” and “imbeciles” were very much a part of the corpus of those laws. The actual term, “insanity”,is pejorative. While I realise it has a precise legal meaning, there will come a time in future legislation, I believe, when the term will have to be looked at and changed. The plea of diminished responsibility in relation to murder and the fact that we will need to look at the whole issue of capacity in any event in future legislation means we shall have a wider debate on this. As regards section 13 and the changes proposed there, again there has been a degree of uncertainty. The improvement of mechanisms that will allow people to be released from the Central Mental Hospital on the basis of enforceable conditions will be seen by many as a progressive move and necessary in terms of liberalising legislation in this area. There will be very little disagreement, I believe, as regards the extent and type of changes being proposed in this Bill. However, it raises the wider question in regard to the grey area between justice and mental health policy. I am glad the Minister of State is present for this debate as I am aware he is personally committed to an ongoing review of the Mental Health Act, and proposals will be forthcoming in relation to this. I have already mentioned legislation as regards capacity. It is very important that we look at the wider aspect of debates in this area and introduce the necessary reforms. Of course all we are doing is improving the legal mechanisms as regards mental incapacity and breaches of individual laws. The other side of this is the infrastructure that is in place to deal with it. Everyone accepts the Central Mental Hospital is not fit for purpose, needs to be moved to a new location and provided with facilities more in keeping with a modern psychiatric facility. Any delay in this, even if it were imposed by the lack of resources, would not do us proud in meeting the psychiatric needs of people who are imprisoned in the current facility. I hope the review of the Mental Health Act will address the wider issue of the inconsistency of the grey area concerning mental capacity and those affected who find themselves in the judicial process. The only remedy so far for them has been incarceration in a facility far from being fit for purpose. If anything, it is not an alternative but a worse version of the prison system. I hope every effort will be made to alleviate this situation. How does the Minister of State see this Bill fitting in with the other legislation in this area that will have to come to the House before the end of the Government’s term? Has he a timetable for when these legislative loose ends will be tied up? I thank the Minister of State for his initiative in providing in-house seminars for Members about section 59(1)(b) of the Mental Health Act 2001, the first of which will be held next week. The provisions of section 59(1)(b) have formed the basis of a Private Members’ Bill that I and colleagues have put before the House. It is also important to have an ongoing debate on how we deal with mental capacity and treat people with psychiatric conditions with dignity. I welcome the legislation and look forward to seeing the additional amendments the Minister of State will put forward. I believe the amended Bill will be all the better for these reforms. 770 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

The sooner this legislation is enacted, the better as it will eliminate any uncertainties that continue to exist.

Senator Feargal Quinn: It seems a comparatively short time since the 2006 legislation on criminal insanity was in the House. The fact this legislation requires amendment is a reminder to us to examine every Bill coming through the House. In his speech, the Minister of State recognised that the Seanad has always taken an interest in the rights of the individual, especially those affected by mental health issues, which is equally true of him. The Bill’s main purpose is to provide greater power to the mental health criminal law review board for the conditional discharge of patients detained by order of a court in the Central Mental Hospital, having been found unfit to be tried or not guilty by reason of insanity. The Bill’s reading is an appropriate time to raise the issue of the use of the word “insanity” when dealing with the law and mental illness. A more modern term such as “mental disorder” applies in Canada, while “mental impairment” is used in Australia. Many legal practitioners believe the term “insanity” could be replaced by a more accurate one such as “mental disorder”. I may be accused of political correctness in this regard. I recall 30 years ago being told to use the term “itinerant” only then to be told to use “Traveller”. Dr. Darius Whelan, lecturer in the law department in University College Cork, said several years ago: “The word ‘insanity’ conjures up inaccurate images which may have an adverse effect on the appropriateness of juries’ decisions and defendant’s instructions to their lawyers.” If the word “insanity” were to be replaced by “mental disorder”, it might give the impression that people could use the insanity defence by reason only of having a mental disorder. I recall the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, stood by this message when he refused to accept amendments to the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 which would have removed the term “insanity” in the Title and replaced it with “mental disorder”. Mr. McDowell then argued if the term “mental disorder” were used, juries would be more likely to find the mental disorder defence applied. Louise Kennefick in her paper, The Relationship between Psychiatry and the Law in the UK and Ireland, stated:

It is likely that the law retained the term [insanity] because it was reluctant to allow psychiatry to have any meaningful impact upon the law ... Criminal law is keen to retain the term for the very reason that it is deeply stigmatic. The word itself can be viewed as counter- acting the fact that an accused is acquitted when he or she is found not guilty by reason of insanity, as it implies that the accused clearly crossed the perceived dividing line between the sane and the insane and this is why they have been excused in the eyes of the law. To remove this division would make it more difficult for the law to justify its exculpatory (tending to clear from charge or guilt) verdicts, thus leaving it at risk of being branded “soft” on crime.

While being supposedly soft on crime is also a stigma that all political parties want to avoid, we must examine the term “insanity” from a 21st century perspective. As Louise Kennefick argued:

Clinging onto a pejorative term [insanity] in the hope of maintaining public confidence in the Government’s crime agenda is coming at the cost of allowing an accused who is excused from responsibility for his actions as a result of the effect of having a mental disorder to be free of depreciatory intimations.

We have the ideal opportunity to put this out-dated term right with a more accurate term like “mental disorder”. I am interested in the Minister of State’s views on this issue. The Bill is clearly needed and has been brought about by a gap in existing legislation. I am pleased the 771 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Feargal Quinn.] Minister of State, Deputy John Maloney, has shown his own interest in this area and welcome his intentions in introducing this legislation.

Senator Lisa McDonald: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy John Maloney, and acknowledge the huge amount of work he has done in the mental health services area since his appointment. Senator Boyle referred to the upcoming seminars on section 59(1)(b)ofthe Mental Health Act. It is also important to recognise the current television and media advertisement campaign on mental health issues. It is illuminating, taking away the stigma associated with such issues and showing it can happen to anyone. That is also a reason this amending legislation to the 2006 Act is important. It is equally important we continue to develop and modernise our thinking in dealing with mental health issues. The Bill is only one strand and I realise the Minister of State is at work on updating the provisions of and amendments to the law. These are required so that we may treat fairly people who suffer from mental illness and whose mental health has become vulnerable for one reason or another. The advertisements on the television explain this to the ordinary person. Society can be too quick to label a person insane. I spoke to a mother of a person who is before the courts accused of a heinous crime. She was of the view that she would rather her son were branded insane than a criminal. There is an issue in respect of people believing a stay in the Central Mental Hospital is more welcome than a spell in prison and this is not a matter to be taken lightly. I realise neither the courts nor judges take the matter lightly. It is strange that certain people or accused people might try to go down the road of being branded in this way. The main purpose of the Bill is to provider greater powers to the Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board in respect of the conditional discharge of patients detained by order of a court in a designated centre. As Senator Boyle remarked, the Central Mental Hospital is the only designated centre at present and it requires updating and modernisation, which must be recognised. Although we are updating the law, we must also update our facilities. Obviously money is an issue in this case but, please God, in the near future we will find the resources to deal with it and build a new hospital. The primary purpose of the Bill is to amend sections 4 and 13 of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006. The 2006 Act was very welcome at the time because it modernised the law on criminal insanity and provided for the first time in Irish law a statutory definition and re- statement of the test for criminal insanity which had been based on existing rules in the common law. A new verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity replaced the guilty but insane verdict and a new plea of guilty but with diminished responsibility was introduced, which had been available as a defence in the UK for some 16 or 17 years previously. That legislation also contained extensive provisions in respect of a person’s fitness to be tried. It amended the law on infanticide, provided for new rules on the transfer of prisoners who become mentally ill while serving a sentence, and established the new review board. The power to recall a patient if conditions of discharge were breached did not exist previously, a matter highlighted by Mr. Justice Hanna in the JB v. The Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board case. Therefore, we intend to amend that Act and this new Bill provides for binding decisions and makes conditional discharge binding such that a patient can be returned to a centre if he or she is in material breach of the conditional discharge. This is to be welcomed. Section 4 provides that a court may make a decision in respect of whether a person should be charged with a criminal offence by reason of mental disorder or is unfit to be tried for such an offence on any of the grounds set out in section 4(2) and that person could be committed for a short-term period. The only designated centre for the purposes of that Act is the Central 772 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

Mental Hospital. I note the comments of the Minister of State to the effect that she will consider the use of community hospitals in this regard. Certain issues may arise at the District Court which deals with minor offences. However, if one visits a District Court on any given day, one can see clearly there are people who should be detained or committed for a short term to have some form of assessment carried out. The Central Mental Hospital is not suitable in this regard. The purpose behind section 4 is to remove any doubt about compliance with the provisions of section 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The convention requires that, except in emergency cases, an individual cannot be deprived of his or her liberty unless he or she is found, on the basis of objective medical expertise, to be of unsound mind and that any mental disorder must warrant compulsory confinement. In time, we will be required to go a step further. Senator Quinn alluded to the issue of how we deem a person to be of unsound mind and which mental disorder might allow for someone to be excused for a crime on the one hand but considered of unsound mind on the other. There is a very fine line in this regard. We must move on and consider such issues as paedophilia and cases of people liable to re- offend in respect of sex offences. What is the position of such people in respect of being of unsound mind? I realise each case will turn on its own facts and everyone has their own mental health issues. Certain people deemed to be sane may at a given time suffer a disruption to or disorientation of their mental health and proceed to commit a crime but then be of sound mind the following day. This issue was highlighted in the JB v. The Mental Health (Criminal Law) Review Board case because the person concerned made a very quick recovery. In that case certain actions may have been due to substance abuse at one time and there is the question of whether the person concerned received the required medication and help. It is possible certain substances were left in the person’s system but then a recovery to full mental health took place. While I am not an expert on this area, I recognise that Senator Bacik and others are. Unfortu- nately, I was unable to hear Senator Bacik’s presentation. However, this is an evolving area and we continue to learn the basis for why certain people must be deprived of their liberty to allow society to function. On the other hand, we must have balance in this delicate area of mental health. This Bill represents an important example of the necessity to ensure the criminal justice system sets the correct balance between safeguarding the rights of persons, especially vulnerable people, and the need to protect the community. The conditional discharge provisions enable patients to whom the relevant sections of the 2006 Act apply and who are no longer in need of detention in the Central Mental Hospital to be allowed some or perhaps total freedom while ensuring the welfare and safety of such patients and the public is fully protected. The legislation represents an excellent progression in our law. We should examine other areas of law, however, and implement similar provisions. Earlier, I referred to sex offenders. Let us consider the case of people who have a history of sexual offences living in county council housing beside a school or anywhere. In some cases such people are left alone, but perhaps they should be monitored. I realise this suggestion might cause mayhem in the world of civil liberties but the interests of society at large are a good deal more important. However, we must comply with the European Convention on Human Rights which is paramount and essential. We must ensure we do not go too far to one side and we must remember that while someone may be mentally unsound, he or she can still cause great damage to a loved one and such a person, whether through psychosis or whatever, may kill, maim or cause harm to society in general. The legislation helps to strike the correct balance in this regard such that people may be recalled. That provision is welcome. Another reason for the introduction of these measures is to free up places in mental health hospitals and the legislation will ensure this will take place. In addition, unless we change the law, we are open to an award of damages to or litigation from a person who might be detained 773 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Lisa McDonald.] unfairly and against their will when such a person has made a full recovery, or from someone who suffers at the hands of a person who has been released and there has been a failure to recall them. I welcome the Bill. There are areas of mental health law and practice other than those covered by the Bill that need to be updated. For the Minister of State’s part, nothing is left wanting and no stone is left unturned. While in office over what I hope will be the next couple of years — please God — he will endeavour to improve the law even further.

Senator Maria Corrigan: I join colleagues in welcoming the Minister of State. Senators referred to the fact this Bill is an effort to grapple with the balance between achieving justice and treating mental illness. It is very heartening that the Minister of State specifically responsible for both of these areas is in the Chamber and is to stay for the entirety of the debate. As with my colleagues, I welcome the Bill. It is a very important step in ensuring we have regard to human rights. The circumstances that have obtained to date are not in anybody’s interest. I refer in particular to circumstances in which individuals who may be ready for discharge from our only designated centre, the Central Mental Hospital, are not discharged because there is a lack of willingness to take responsibility for their discharge. There is concern over discharging because, as matters stand, one is either deemed cured and fit for release or not cured, in which case one must remain in the hospital. This does not really reflect the reality of mental illness. The individuals affected by the current regime are experiencing mental health challenges. The proposals in this Bill would make provision for conditional release. It is not just a question of being released for a trial period under supervision because the conditions should stipulate the need for ongoing treatment. The proposals reflect the reality of mental illness and the supports that are required by those affected when making their way in society and trying to function to the best of their ability. They are to be welcomed. Apart from making references to the practical difficulties faced by the Central Mental Hospital with regard to space and beds, the legislation offers the individuals concerned much better quality of life and a much better step forward. It is a step too far for one to resume normal life when supports are treatment are withdrawn quite suddenly on one’s release from a supervised, structured setting such as a Central Mental Hospital. An individual in a psychiatric institution who is not legally detained would never be expected to make the step from hospital- isation to community living without any access to support. It is not realistic and was always likely to end in failure. The proposals in the Bill are much more realistic than the measures that now obtain and they offer a better chance of successful rehabilitation. I feel the need to raise an issue that is not covered by the Bill. As a result of the present circumstances, there are in the system individuals who might have been fit for discharge a long time ago. However, because we were reluctant to release them because no conditions could be attached to their release, they were never released. The consequence is that there are a number of individuals who have become quite institutionalised and for whom discharge to community living has become a very distant and uncertain goal. Will the Minister of State consider what steps might be taken for those individuals? Colleagues have raised the issue of capacity legislation, as I have done on numerous occasions. The Minister of State is very conscious of it. That legislation will have a very important role in the practical implementation of legislation such as that before the House and will have a bearing on the circumstances in which people find themselves.

774 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

With regard to capacity, while we are very clear about the fitness of people with mental illness to stand trial, there is a grey area in respect of those with an intellectual disability. There are individuals with an intellectual disability who have gone through the court system, received no support therein and were sentenced to imprisonment. Since they were not found to have a mental health disorder, they could not be admitted to a facility such as the Central Mental Hospital and therefore found themselves in mainstream prison settings. The Minister of State is very conscious of this, particularly in light of the plans for the future development of the Central Mental Hospital. The mainstream prison setting is not one that a person with a mild or moderate mental handicap can be excepted to survive in or in which he can be expected to function safely. We need to address this. It will not be addressed solely by developing the new Central Mental Hospital and a similar forensic-type facility for people with intellectual disability. Legislation may have to be introduced. One reason I raise this issue is because we have in the past admitted people with an intellectual disability to the Central Mental Hospital after their having gone through the prison system. We had very serious concerns over their ability to survive in the prison setting. When admitted to the Central Mental Hospital, they did not present with a mental illness but with an intellectual disability. They, too, have become institutionalised in the Central Mental Hospital. This is another issue for us to address. The Minister of State said considerable demands are being placed on the Central Mental Hospital when determining whether somebody is fit for trial and when establishing an individual’s mental health or well-being. He is considering the use of alternative settings and may revert to Senators on this subject on Committee Stage. If alternative settings can 4o’clock be used, they will be very welcome. Senator McDonald stated cases arise daily, from District Court level upwards, in which individuals who should have access to some form of psychiatric assessment are not afforded the opportunity because it is not always practical. I commend the Bill to the House.

Senator Jim Walsh: I join other Senators in supporting the general thrust of this Bill. It is a short technical Bill, but nonetheless an extremely important one. It arises because of the Crimi- nal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, which was a significant development and a milestone in dealing with this area of law. In particular, sections of the Act dealt with the fitness to be tried and the review of detention. Since then it has become apparent that the powers of the review board in dealing with discharges was constrained in that it did not have the power of supervision of those conditional discharges and, therefore, issues regarding refraining from alcohol and drugs and taking particular medication were not appropriately defined. As a consequence of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, a possible lacuna was identified in the 2006 legislation. The Minister in this instance has moved to amend that and has made fairly sensible amendments which will obviously improve the operation of this area. Indeed, only last night we had a debate at our parliamentary party meeting. Recently, the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, has been very much to the forefront in much of the public debate in this area and has shown himself to be particularly committed to progressing a new vision for the treatment of persons with mental disability and ensuring the quality of the services which they can access, their living environment and their quality of life will be focussed upon and improved as a consequence of the initiatives and the commitment he has com- mendably shown since taking up office within the past year or so. 775 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Senator Jim Walsh.]

The Bill has to ensure that we do not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights Act by having persons in confinement without absolute due process and without clinical supervision. The Bill will provide that before committing a person to the Central Mental Hospital for examination, the court must first hear evidence from an approved medical officer and it can order that such be carried out, either on an inpatient or on an outpatient basis. It also will deal with the issue where the review board since its inception was somewhat reluctant to release patients, even though it might have considered them suitable for discharge because there was a doubt about the statutory powers to enforce conditions. Obviously, the Bill addresses this appropriately. I agree with the comments made by the Minister of State in his opening remarks, and also by Senator Corrigan, about the Central Mental Hospital and the need to ensure that it is able to function to its maximum potential. Obviously, it will be under strain because of the increased workloads that will be applying to it. I welcome the fact the review board now will be able to make arrangements for the proper supervision of those patients. It is sensible that it can make the discharges subject to those conditions. The clinical director can make arrangements, including specifying the supervision of those particular patients. I also welcome the fact that subsequent to the discharge the conditions can be varied by the review board on application by the clinical directors involved, and after a period of one year, the review board has the power to grant, refuse or change the conditions. It is also correct because in all of this there is obviously the dignity and the entitlements of the individuals concerned to consider, but also regard must be taken of their safety and the safety of others as well in certain circumstances. The Bill also provides that the person may be returned to a designated centre if the clinical director diagnoses that such is necessary because of some material breach of the conditions, and that would obviously subsequently be subject to the review board. While it is short and technical legislation, it will impact positively on how this entire area is dealt with. I welcome and subscribe to the support other Members have given the Bill.

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy John Moloney): Before I reply to the specific points raised by the Senators, I acknowledge that this Bill is originating in this House. I hope all future Bills dealing with mental health and disability originate in this House. Clearly, and without saying it for the sake of saying it, given the level of compassion and interest in all aspects of issues that have caused a certain level of stigma in Irish society, it is better debated here where we have time to deal with the specific issues. Particularly from today’s debate, I welcome the level of compassion of Senators and, more importantly, because compassion is only a small limited part of it all, the sense of urgency in trying to make the change. I welcome also the way the debate has been treated. Before I go into the responses, I will make a few points. In November last, as mentioned here by one or two Senators, we were dealing with the issue of ECT treatment. It is important to make the point that I gave a commitment on that day that we would have a session, not as a briefing but involving persons from both sides of the debate to come in properly to speak with Members of the House. Those dates have been agreed for 23 February and 9 March, and I hope as many as possible can come. Quite obviously, it is a serious issue which will come before both Houses and we should be always properly briefed by both sides of the debate. 776 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

On 1 March, I propose to hold a press briefing in Government Buildings to outline how we intend to deliver on our commitments in A Vision for Change. While the temptation is there to extend the timeframe from the original proposal of seven to ten years, or to reduce the recommendation, I propose to stick with the timeframe and also with the recommendations. In the afternoon, I propose to hold a confidence-type function and to invite in persons from Amnesty International, the mental health coalition, the Joint Committee on Health and Chil- dren and all those Members who have an interest in seeing A Vision for Change. On that morning, I hope to outline how we intend to deal with non-capital proposals in A Vision for Change — I see the director of mental health doing that — and the capital side will be dealt with by Mr. Brian Gilroy. Bairbre Nic Aonghusa will have the overall overarching brief to deliver on that day. It is important for myself as well to give the political commitments, and I intend to do so. On that day, I will first introduce the issue of how, in our campaign in April, we intend to deal with the elimination of the stigma attached to mental health, and that will be fronted by Mr. John Saunders. It is also important to say that I will come into the House specifically to deal with mental health issues on 23 March, and again to come forward with the stigma campaign in April. To respond to the issues, first, I thank Senator Regan for his sense of immediacy in supporting the Bill and driving it forward. I thank him for the positive comments. Senator O’Donovan raised a few issues regarding the review board. It is important for us to try to define the sense of urgency, and why. At present, the review board has the authority to release persons from the Central Mental Hospital, conditionally or unconditionally. The difficulty has been that, even though conditions may be imposed on the individual, there is no supervision or no legal framework for direct involvement in such supervision. There is a rush to ensure we will have such supervision. The clinical director of the Central Mental Hospital, Professor Harry Kennedy, regularly speaks about the pressure he and his staff are under in the provision of beds in the hospital. Owing to this change in the legislation, we may be in a position to free up five or six beds. That would be a welcome development for a hospital constantly under pressure to provide beds. Senator O’Donovan asked about the composition of the board. It has three members, Mr. Justice McCracken, Mr. Michael Mulcahy, consultant psychiatrist, and Mr. Timothy Dalton, former Secretary General. A further question was whether there was a framework whereby the board provided an annual account of its work. There is an annual report which is available on its website. Senator Bacik and others have mentioned the fact that the only centre available has been the Central Mental Hospital, while all Senators said they would favour an alternative system being involved. I was asked specifically by Senator Bacik and others about our commitment on this issue. Clearly, we wish to have other centres and to support the court diversion programme. The real issue will be to ensure we will have alternative locations. Somebody referred to community hospitals, which I would fully support. I am not a legal practitioner but some Members of the House are. That people are referred from the District Court to the Central Mental Hospital is absolute nonsense. Certainly, if we have the provision to do it, we are committed to ensuring this process can be dealt with by way of community hospitals. That is one of the amendments I will bring forward on Committee Stage. “Approved medical officer” means a consultant psychiatrist. Senator Boyle also asked about bringing forward an amendment regarding the use of approved centres other than the Central Mental Hospital. I can confirm that I will be doing this. I support the proposal referred to by Senator Quinn. He talked about the Canadian and Australian models and the use of the terms “mental impairment” and “mental disorder” rather 777 Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: 17 February 2010. Second Stage

[Deputy John Moloney.] than “insane”. That is something on which we must move forward. We have set up a group chaired by John Saunders and comprising people such as the consultant Kevin Malone of Elm Park, Tony Bates, John Treacy, Ossie Kilkenny and many others who have given freely of their time to support the anti-stigma campaign. I am also hoping to use local radio and local media. Senator McDonald referred to the television advertisements. They are national advertisements but we need to involve local radio. I am already in discussions with local radio stations in the context of having a half hour programme each week about taking care of one’s mental health. I dislike using the word “brave” in the context of seeking mental health treatment because it implies that there must be a problem if one must be brave about it. There should not be such nonsense attached to it. I am hoping we can encourage people who might have made their name on the football or hurling field or local drama association — in other words, people who are well known locally — to come forward. I often make the point that a lad from Clonaghadoo or Ballyhuppahaun — Senators might not have heard of those places — might not connect with a national campaign but would connect with people in a local campaign if they knew of somebody who was prepared to go on local radio and say that at one time in their lives they had to seek mental health support. The trick is to show that people can do this and return as quickly as possible to their normal work or area of endeavour. I support what the Senator says. The campaign we are discussing undertaking in April will do this. Senators also raised the issue of the location and condition of the Central Mental Hospital. I made it clear when we changed our minds about locating the hospital at Thornton Hall that we must provide a new central mental hospital. It is one of my commitments to firm up that proposal this year. I have also been asked to meet people at Portrane but I do not intend to meet anybody until I have the money stacked up. I hope to have it by way of a public private partnership to be agreed this year. It is essential to ensure we will have a properly functioning Central Mental Hospital. Unfortunately, conditions at present are not conducive either to recovery on the part of the patients or the well-being of the staff. I accept the points made by Senator McDonald about the television advertisements. They are well worthwhile. It is something we must continue to promote. Senator Corrigan made similar points and referred to the Mental Capacity Act. The most important point raised concerns the support available to persons who are discharged. That is the huge test. We must ensure people who are discharged, unlike in the UK model, will have supports available to ensure they will not be back on the streets or, worse, seeking full-time support from the health service. It is important that people discharged from the Central Mental Hospital are supported in the community. I praise the staff in the many centres and particularly the outpatients clinic at Usher’s Island in Dublin which provides workshops, occupational ther- apy facilities and creative therapies. Perhaps we refer too often to A Vision for Change and rely on it to deliver everything. However, there is a commitment in it to provide four additional forensic community mental health teams, one in each HSE area. That is on the non-capital side, an issue which will be dealt with by Martin Grogan on 1 March. I welcome the genuine commitment expressed by Senators. We have brought forward the Bill owing to the level of urgency attached to the amendments to sections 4 and 13. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has committed himself to dealing with all the other issues involved in detail. I look forward to Committee Stage. With regard to the proposed amendments brought forward today, I realise they are substantial and relevant and will be taken on board by me and my officials. On that note, I thank my officials for their usual excellent briefing both before and during the debate.

Question put and agreed to. 778 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

An Cathaoirleach: When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Senator Maria Corrigan: Next Tuesday.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 23 February 2010.

Sitting suspended at 4.20 p.m. and resumed at 5 p.m.

Business of Seanad. Senator Donie Cassidy: As there is a vote of confidence in the Dáil, I understand there will be one or two votes in the Dáil and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, will not be available to come to the House until 5.30 p.m. On the Order of Business it was decided that the Private Members’ motion would conclude at 7.30 p.m. As usual, two hours will be allocated to the motion. I would appreciate the co-operation of the House in this regard. I move: “That the sitting be suspended until 5.30 p.m.”.

Acting Chairman (Senator Fiona O’Malley): Is that agreed? Agreed.

Sitting suspended at 5.05 p.m. and resumed at 5.30 p.m.

Power Sharing Agreement in Northern Ireland: Motion. Acting Chairman (Senator Fiona O’Malley): I welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Micheál Martin, to discuss No. 37, motion 19, on Northern Ireland. I call on the Leader to move the motion and open the discussion. He has 12 minutes.

Senator Donie Cassidy: I move:

That Seanad Éireann commends the Government for its role in brokering the recent power sharing agreement in Northern Ireland.

On behalf of all Members I welcome the Minister. I congratulate him, the Taoiseach and their assistants for their marvellous work during the talks that took place in the North of Ireland. I congratulate them for their efforts during recent weeks and months. They put many long hours into ensuring that parties had the space and the confidence to reach this important agreement. As all Members know, the Minister noted that Mr. Sammy Wilson called this a “deal made in Ulster”. It is an agreement that speaks to the enormous progress that has taken place in Northern Ireland in recent years. The principles of mutual respect, partnership and equality which are the very core of the Good Friday Agreement have been given renewed expression in this agreement. The working relationships built up between parties and individuals in the Executive and the Assembly during these negotiations will have gone a long way towards reducing some of the barriers of mistrust and suspicion which, in the past, hindered change and progress. We all know that there is still some way to go before Northern Ireland can leave behind the divisions of the past. However, it is clear that the parties approached the talks with a willingness to find common ground and deliver a deal that was fair to the two main communities and representative of their needs. This attitude has ensured the agreement they have reached is sustainable and can deliver for the people of Northern Ireland. As the Minister outlined in his statement and will outline again today, the deal covers issues at the very heart of a modern society, particularly policing and justice. Ordinary people, particularly in Northern Ireland, attach the highest importance to feeling secure in their homes and on the streets. They want to know they can expect fair treatment in the courts and that their rights will be upheld. 779 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Donie Cassidy.]

Elected representatives from communities across Northern Ireland will be directly responsible for delivering legislation and policies on policing and justice issues. Their knowledge of their communities which elect them puts them in the strongest position to deliver efficient solutions that will serve the needs of their constituents. The deal reached is comprehensive and will allow a new Minister for Justice the scope to deliver practical policies, with the support of the Executive and, no doubt, the vigorous scrutiny of the Assembly and the public. The Hillsborough agreement also addresses the sensitive and contentious issue of parading. For many years parades and public assemblies have been in the news for all the wrong reasons. In seasons gone by, they have been marked by fierce disagreement and, occasionally, violence. The deal puts in place a framework which will culminate in legislation in the Assembly on managing parades. The agreement on parading is one which could only have been achieved between the parties. It recognises the rights of those who parade, as well as those who live in areas in which parades take place. It recognises that there can be competing rights and crucially — echoing the Good Friday Agreement — that everyone has the right to live free from sectarian harassment. The Good Friday Agreement underlined the central importance of tradition and the expression of cultural identity by the two main communities in Northern Ireland. Those who negotiated the Agreement understood that, without a culture of tolerance and respect for different traditions, Northern Ireland could never achieve mutual understanding or lasting recognition. Sensitivities still persist in Northern Ireland around public expressions of cultural identity. Parading is just one example of this. The use of flags and emblems, music and the bands that perform it and the expression of identity through language can be divisive and resurrect old hatreds and suspicions. The Good Friday Agreement stressed the importance of respect for linguistic diversity, particularly with regard to the Irish language and Ulster-Scots. Much has been done through Foras na Gaeilge and the Ulster-Scots Agency board to promote the development of the Irish language and Ulster-Scots. At St. Andrews the importance of language to cultural identity was underlined and a commitment was given to introduce an Irish language Act. I am confident that the spirit of partnership which characterised the talks at Hillsborough can be maintained and that further measures to protect and enhance the Irish language and Ulster-Scots can be implemented. Respect for and understanding of each other’s cultures can make a real contribution to improving community relations in Northern Ireland. Huge strides have been made to bridge the divisions between communities and build sustainable relationships based on an honest acceptance of one another. The construction by the State of the visitors centre at the Battle of the Boyne site in Old- bridge, County Meath, in recognition of the historical significance of the site, acknowledged the importance of tradition and cultural identity. The centre has been open for almost two years and received many visitors from Northern Ireland from both communities. It is making a significant contribution to breaking down the barriers of misunderstanding and mistrust and fostering lasting reconciliation between the traditions on the island. It is just one example of the practical steps we can take to build better community relations. There is a need to continue to support groups and individuals looking to enhance and embed reconciliation in order that good relations can be woven into the fabric of government and society. It is unacceptable that sectarian attitudes persist. It is an utter tragedy that there are still incidents of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, as they cast a shadow over the huge progress made in recent years. It is equally unacceptable that a small criminal minority of so-called dissident republicans continue a sporadic campaign of violence against the PSNI. The cowardly attack on Constable Peadar Heffron who in many ways was a great example and personified the new beginning in policing in Northern Ireland was particularly despicable and evil. The 780 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion devolution of justice and policing powers to the Northern Ireland Assembly will further under- line the futility of these violent actions which have no legitimacy, serve no cause, have no community support and will not succeed in derailing the new political dispensation in Northern Ireland. I am heartened by the Hillsborough agreement. Its spirit has the power to inspire the placing of a renewed focus on the ethos of the Good Friday Agreement — mutual respect, partnership, equality and tolerance — and to help Northern Ireland to lay the foundations of a better and shared future for all.

Senator Cecilia Keaveney: I second the motion. However, in doing so, coming from where I do, I would still like to be able to be blunt and say I continue to have concerns. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michéal Martin, and many others put a significant amount of time into the efforts being made in the North and were available at the crucial time. Many have invested a significant amount of time in the process in the past 20 years. I commend all those who were involved in any way. My one regret with regard to the all-party agreement being lauded is that it is not an all- party agreement. It has been the tradition during the years for a couple of sides to get together to drive something forward, leaving others out in the cold. If one looks at the history of the DUP, traditionally it has been the “No” party. Now the party which traditionally has been the “Yes” party feels it has been left out in the cold. While I am glad we have an agreement, that matters have moved on and that agreement on policing and justice issues is so close to fruition, I am not glad that we have returned to having committees made up of two parties — three plus three — rather than having six members from many parties. If any committee set up in these Houses was to become a monopoly or duopoly, people would be concerned. It is important that I express this concern. One of the main reasons we need progress on the issues involved is the significant dissident threat posed. Not a day goes by without there being a bomb scare or someone’s life being threatened. Last night I was talking to somebody involved in the Northern Ireland customs service. While on the way to attend a function here, the person concerned received a telephone call to warn them that two threats had been made against customs service staff dealing with money and diesel laundering along the Border. There are real risks, as nobody knows better than Peadar and Fiona Heffron. I stood in the Royal Victoria Hospital with their family won- dering if Peadar would survive. I was only on the fringes of it, which is not where anybody wants to be. They are in the centre, watching him trying to come back. I am very glad to hear he is at the stage where he is able to order in pizzas and is doing his upper body physio, which is very positive. However, in this day and age, so far into the peace process, there should not be a situation where somebody is fighting for their life and their life will never be the same again. This is particularly so in this case, when he was so much a symbol of how things had changed — a Gaelic-speaking, Gaelic football-playing PSNI officer. I reiterate the point that if anything comes out of this, the message has to be the opposite of what was intended. The intention of that attack was to stop anyone else from that background joining the PSNI. Every one of us should say clearly that we are advocating that the type of person Peadar Heffron is is the type who should still come forward and give of their services for their part of their island and, indeed, their country. There is no room for complacency or for giving succour to terrorism. It is time to move on. I welcome the new start that has been made with the appointment of a new leader of the SDLP. I wish Margaret Ritchie well, and I also wish Mark Durcan well in his new role. I would not rule out new beginnings with Fianna Fáil going into the North. We have three fora there 781 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Cecilia Keaveney.] and opportunities will arise. Much of the time, we are too worried about what people are thinking, we are worried about rocking boats. We have to balance not rocking boats with actually presenting new opportunities and ideas, and letting people find those new opportunities. There are real issues for people in the North, such as jobs, housing, infrastructure and who will pay for maintaining the economy into the future. We all know it is public service jobs and social welfare in the main in the North. We have to take on the issues that matter to people. I commend the PSNI, the Garda Síochána and the Customs Service on the work they are doing on cross-Border crime, and I commend those involved in cross-Border education, cross-Border health and cross-Border infrastructure, in particular in terms of train links and the funding that has been recommitted for the N2-A5 road. I reiterate that I have a problem with the fact people using the euro were being exploited. These are simple straightforward issues we should now be moving to deal with. The Assembly should be dealing with issues that impact on people’s lives, such as television signals in Donegal that cannot be received in the North and vice versa. In this regard, there are mutual solutions as we move towards digital television, and the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, is involved in that. There is also the development of the Foyle to maximise its potential into the future and there is much work in regard to trying to drive regional development, although these are long- term processes. One of the major problems in the North is that one side has three heads and two tails, and the other side has five heads and 14 tails. That is the assumption that is made because one side does not meet the other side unless one gets to third level education. The development in Omagh, where there will be a campus of five or six schools, is positive. While the schools will not be integrated, they will share facilities, which is an important move forward. We must think of this issue not just as a problem for “them up there” but as a problem for “us” on the island of Ireland. We do not know the other side. We look at our history but what are we taught? I can easily say, given the report I did on how to teach history in areas of recent conflict, that in the North the tradition would have been that if one was in a Protestant school, one learned about the wives of Henry VIII, and if one was in a Catholic school, one learned about British oppression during the Famine. We have to be able to teach “the other side” here as well as there. We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the other people and get to know each other. For either side, no one will click their fingers and “the other” will disappear. We have to get to a stage where we understand each other and are able to live side by side. This comes down to us, here and there, looking at how we teach history, particularly on interfaces and on the Border. That can drive critical thinking and can drive people to analyse what they see. This presents better employees and employers into the future, which is what is really needed in the North. What I am asking for is an intervention that is useful for getting to know each other but also to develop that critical thinking and the creativity this will yield for employers and employees. I also wish to raise the issue of parades and culture, which was touched on by the Leader. This was one of the biggest issues coming towards the end of these negotiations, as I understand it. I cringed when I heard the solution. People were saying: “It is not your road or my road anymore. It is our road, so I will march down our road”, which I assume must be the Garvaghy Road. My problem is that we are not doing enough to get the understanding of what is “our road”. If I hear the Lambeg drum, how do I react? When someone else hears the bodhran, how do they react? Is music being used as a weapon for perpetuating conflict? Can it be used 782 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion as a tool for progressing peace? Those are the interventions we need to be very active about in preschool, primary school and right through the school curriculum because we will not change this overnight given that generations of people are involved. As the Minister, Mr. Sammy Wilson, told me, when I was commenting on a report which suggested that people felt schools should be safe havens away from the awfulness of the community, the research of Dr. Alan McCully of the UNESCO centre at the University of Ulster at Coleraine was very clear that the children in schools do not necessarily want to be changed, but they want to know the bigger picture. They do not want the school to be a safe haven away from reality; they want the school to be at the centre of explaining to them what it is all about. On the issue of culture, I intend to prepare a report on that issue of music and culture and how it can be used in areas of conflict to perpetuate conflict. However, we should also take the wider brief and work with education, both here and also as a current 32-county problem. I conclude by wishing the parties in the North the best for the future, and I want to be as inclusive as possible in that. We should have a regular slot every quarter to discuss issues of mutual concern. What is good for one part of Ulster is good for all of Ulster. I look forward to a better Ulster and a better Ireland in the coming decade.

Senator Maurice Cummins: I welcome the Minister. I also welcome Senator Keaveney’s remarks. While I remember Fianna Fáil policy in the 1970s and early 1980s, she is now espousing the policies we were espousing at that time. Fianna Fáil has come a long way, and I compliment it on the changes it has made in regard to Northern Ireland. The Independent Members have an amendment to the motion, which I commend. I hope the Government will accept it as an all-party motion because Northern Ireland is an area where there has been all-party consensus in the past and we have agreed in many areas, which is only right. I hope this consensus will continue into the future and that we will witness the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement and see communities, which were so divided, work together in a spirit of peace and reconciliation to build a greater quality of life for all people in Northern Ireland. I welcome this opportunity to reflect on the recent achievements and the progress on the path to peace. Fine Gael welcomes the agreement reached between the parties in Northern Ireland on the devolution of justice and policing powers to the power-sharing institutions. It was the clear wish and hope of the vast majority of the people in Northern Ireland that this deal be reached. The positive outcome to the lengthy negotiations has averted the prospect of a prolonged period of instability and uncertainty. It required intensive efforts from each party and I compliment each party and both Governments for their efforts. I hope they have secured a complete and enduring agreement. The challenge now for the parties is to work together to deliver on the implementation of the remaining elements of the Good Friday Agreement so the people of Northern Ireland can be convinced the political process can deliver real improvements to their lives. The Northern parties can be assured that Fine Gael will continue to play its part in supporting 6o’clock and assisting full implementation of the agreement. April 12 will be a historic and defining day in Northern Ireland. Fine Gael agrees with the Independent Monitoring Commission that the devolution of policing and justice powers brings important benefits to Northern Ireland, not least in allowing closer integration of law enforcement with other domestic policies in which it is involved. The IMC also made the point that dissident groups tried to exploit the uncertainty on this issue and to argue that politics was not succeeding in Northern Ireland when the reality is very different. They have failed in their attempts to create a divide. With regard to the position of 783 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Maurice Cummins.] Minister for Justice, I am confident that the First Minister and Deputy First Minister will find a strong candidate who will be acceptable to all shades of opinion, as would be everybody’s wish. Fine Gael, as always, stands ready to support the forces of law and order in confronting the threat of dissident republicans. The Government will have the full support of the party in regard to whatever action is necessary to take these terrorists out of society as they pose a serious threat to this State. As I stated on the Order of Business some weeks ago, I am deeply concerned at reports that the Real IRA is actively recruiting new members from this jurisdiction. I heard this said on a number of occasions in regard to a number of counties. It is of paramount importance that young men and women are not lured into these organisations by some romantic notion of Irish republicanism and the continuation of an armed struggle. It is essential that people understand and see that co-operation and power sharing are the only show in town and form the normal and effective way of delivering for everybody. We must ensure the Army and the Garda Síochána have the necessary resources to monitor the activities of these dissident groups in this State. A concentrated effort to disrupt their recruitment methods and other activities will prevent the atrocities in which these groups have been and are engaged. Senator Keaveney referred to the recent absolutely despicable attack on Mr. Peadar Heffron, a man fluent in the Irish language and involved in playing Gaelic games. Irrespective of whether he speaks Irish or plays Gaelic games, these types of attacks on the PSNI are despicable and should be a thing of the past. We in this jurisdiction must do everything we can to ensure the perpetrators of these acts are dealt with at every possible opportunity should they try to take refuge in this State. When speaking about Northern Ireland, it would be remiss of me not to pay tribute to the former leader of the SDLP, Mr. Mark Durkan, whose fearless leadership of the SDLP not alone benefited his party, but, more importantly, benefited all the people of Northern Ireland. I was delighted to meet Ms Margaret Ritchie earlier who was present in the House at 5 p.m. when this debate was due to commence. My party leader and several Front Bench members attended the SDLP conference last Saturday-week. Ms Ritchie’s appointment comes at a critical time for politics in Northern Ireland. I wish her well in the future. It is essential that this House is kept abreast of developments in the North-South Ministerial Council, as proposed in the amendment tabled by the Independent Senators. This is the least we can expect. It is hoped the Leader of the House will ensure this happens regularly. Another positive step in the path to peace in Northern Ireland came with the announcement by the INLA, the Official IRA and the east Antrim brigade of the Ulster Defence Association that they have put their weapons beyond use. The completion of the decommissioning process removes a key obstacle to political progress in Northern Ireland and fulfils the clearly expressed democratic wish of the Irish people, North and South, when they endorsed the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. I compliment the Minister on his efforts in this regard. I know he put many long hours into the process. He will have the support of Fine Gael in progressing the Good Friday Agreement and tackling the situation of dissident republicanism which I believe is a threat to this State at this time.

Senator Dan Boyle: The tabling of this motion is an opportunity for the House to welcome the agreement reached between the Northern Ireland parties on the devolution of justice and policing functions. It is another important step towards the normalisation of politics in Northern Ireland. 784 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

I had the good fortune of being a curious bystander on the Monday of the week the agreement was reached as I was attending a meeting of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly in Stormont. The comings and goings of people between Stormont and Hillsborough gave me a sense of the level of discussions between the parties. While the position in terms of reaching agreement was still uncertain at that time, there was a willingness to come to an agreement. That an agreement has been reached is be welcomed, in particular given the difficult political circumstances. This is an election year in Northern Ireland. To have reached agreement when the opportunity of scoring political points exists is to the credit of all involved. We have an opportunity of extending this as the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly meets in full session next week in Cavan. It is hoped the experiences of the agreement can spread throughout the three strands. This motion and forthcoming meeting of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly presents us with an opportunity to consider where we stand in terms of development in this regard. It is true to say that with the devolution of the justice and policing functions, much progress has been made within Northern Ireland. Through the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly and its work, work between the east-west strand has developed significantly. While there has been much progress on the North-South strand, in particular in regard to the all-island bodies in the food and tourism areas, much remains to be done in particular on the interparliamentary side. We look forward to the establishment later this year of a North-South parliamentary forum. The normalisation of politics in Northern Ireland is to be welcomed. I had an opportunity to meet the British ambassador during a visit to Ireland recently of the Northern Ireland Westminster Committee. I pointed out that a recent Minister for the Environment in Northern Ireland could be criticised by the Green Party in Northern Ireland on political grounds, namely, that he is a climate change denier. Northern Ireland politics appears always to have been built on the denial of one issue or another. It was good to have a political issue on which to have disagreement. The motion before us welcomes the process. The friendly amendment tabled by Senators O’Toole, Harris and Quinn in regard to the civic forum is another important element. Just as the parliamentary forum between North and South needs to be developed, the existence of a parallel structure in Northern Ireland is important in terms of our development of cross-community relations. While there has been a half-hearted attempt and, perhaps, over-politicised effort to do so in the past, what has been suggested by bodies such as Co-operation Ireland needs to considered at this stage, namely, the involvement of non-governmental organisations in a civic forum, not so much as an antidote as a good contrast to the type of increasingly normalised politicking that goes on in Stormont, similar to how the Seanad is to Dáil Éireann, which is our argument in this Chamber. I am not too sure if everyone present would agree with that. I agree that in welcoming the most recent agreement we need to be aware of the threats that exist. Despite recent disarmament measures taken by a number of paramilitary organisations, a small but significant number of people still have recourse to violence to achieve political ends. Every effort must be made to isolate them further within Northern Ireland and elsewhere on the island of Ireland. The bipartisan nature of our approach to Northern Ireland policy will be useful in achieving this. While there is no immediate violent intent or involvement in terms of pursuing other extreme opinions, it should be noted that, according to a recent opinion poll, at least 5% or 6% of the Northern Ireland electorate have an irredentist approach towards their own community. They will be contesting future elections and the extent to which they will be able to stymie or frustrate further progress is something about which we need to be concerned. The only way of avoiding this is by showing that politics can work. 785 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Dan Boyle.]

I join in welcoming the new SDLP leader, Margaret Ritchie, and wish her well in her function. While it does not conform to normal modes of government, the success of the inter-party government in Northern Ireland is dependent on having a multi-party approach to get us through this period. In the final part of the process of devolving police and justice functions we will see for the first time in Northern Ireland’s history the possibility of engaging in normal politics. That is something Members of this House, as well as the Minister and his Department, should be encouraging most strongly.

Senator Joe O’Toole: I welcome the Minister and acknowledge the extraordinary energy, commitment and expertise he has shown recently in working in concert with all the parties in the North and their party leaders, as well as with the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister. I thank him for doing this important work which should be recognised. I am sure he would be the first to say others put in a huge effort at the same time. Politics did itself proud in that period in the North.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Is the Senator proposing an amendment to the motion?

Senator Joe O’Toole: Yes. I move amendment No. 1:

After “Northern Ireland.” to add the following:

“Recognises the efforts of the Taoiseach to advance the establishment of the civic forum and determines that there be a report to the Seanad at least once each session on developments in the North South Ministerial Council.”

The amendment proposes a minor addendum which I have discussed with the Minister, to the effect that there should be a report to the Seanad “at least once each session”, rather than “at least once every two months”. The Minister has said he is happy to accept the change, which means there will be a report three or four times a year. I understand that is acceptable. I chair the ad hoc parliamentary group of Co-operation Ireland which has made a number of trips, North and South. We have been in contact with the Department of Foreign Affairs and seen formally at first hand the workings of the Middletown autism centre. In fact, we made strong representations to the Minister for Education and Science on the matter and I am glad to note the matter has been resolved. We also met Waterways Ireland and the Commissioners of Irish Lights to discuss other issues. That group should have a right of audience at the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, if this can be arranged. As it should be easy enough to have some people there informally, I ask the Minister to revert to me on the matter. I was here in 1987 when a distraught John Hume was in the Members’ bar. I did not know him that well at the time — I knew him through my involvement with the INTO and was friendly with his family. None of the parties was talking to him in 1987 or 1988 because, as he explained to me, he was talking to Gerry Adams. It is important to recognise this and remember that people did take chances and risks to move matters along. They did move from that point, although there was a lot of opposition. At the time significant media organs in the South challenged and took apart both of them for talking to each other. It is worth recognising, however, that those talks brought us to this point. I am not making a party political point, but I have a simple rule which I have learned from my years in politics. If the people elect candidates to this House or the Dáil, that is it. I am delighted that Senator Doherty of Sinn Féin is present. I do not agree with his politics much of the time, but Sinn Féin voices both here and in the Dáil are important. There should be no 786 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion middle line in terms of their involvement; although we can argue and disagree on points of policy, their commitment to the parliamentary system must be recognised. I am delighted that the Minister can accept the amendment. It saddens me, however, that we do not receive reports on the North-South Ministerial Council. Before tabling the amendment yesterday, I checked what was going on this month at the Council. I would like to mention the issues I would like the House to discuss from now on. The two Finance Ministers, Deputy Brian Lenihan and Mr. Sammy Wilson, met today to discuss the implications of NAMA for the North. They also discussed related banking sector issues, matters affecting both the North and South, including the development of a special EU programme to be overseen by the two Ministers. That is the first anybody has heard of the matter either here or in the other House. On 5 March the two Enviroment Ministers, Deputy John Gormley and Mr. Edwin Poots, will meet to discuss the issue of illegal waste dumping in the North by Southern operators, as well as flooding and climate change. Also in the first week in March the two Transport Ministers, Deputy Noel Dempsey and Mr. Conor Murphy, will discuss the issue of road safety. There have been many road accidents in the Border counties, both north and south of the Border. They will also discuss the drink driving limits in both jurisdictions. All of this is hugely important. One thing that kills debates in this House is that one has various spokespersons, but the North-South Ministerial Council cracks that nut. The Minister may come and explain what has been going on for the last month. In the past fortnight I have dealt with financial, environmental and transport issues. One should be able to get a lively debate going to ensure the people are fully informed. The Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Foreign Affairs should be enthusiastic about this because it is a really important issue. The parliamentary group of Co-operation Ireland has met the North-South Ministerial Council secretariat on a number of occasions and I am flabbergasted at the amount of work being done. It is a pity, therefore, that we do not receive reports on the Council. Last month I suggested we should celebrate the first ten years of its operation, but we did not do so. I am well aware of initiatives being taken by the Government, including by the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on the advancement of the Civic Forum, a crucial link between political structures and the public and which gives a voice to ordinary people. I understand another meeting is planned to be held at Farmleigh House. It should be met with bells and whistles to let the people see what can be done because it is a win-win for everybody. The most important matter is how can the all-island parliamentary forum be advanced. This is a huge barrier to cross; therefore, we must take baby steps, but let us do so. It is proposed to meet on a conference or convention basis and the more we hear about this the better. We should move forward and make things happen. One of the downsides of the peace process is that it has taken our eye off the ball as regards what is happening in communities. There is a lot of violence in communities in the North; meanwhile the two governments have pulled back from investing in local peace initiatives. They should reconsider because it is a major issue. Building bridges deep into the community is important, but it is not happening at parliamentary or community level. It is happening at the top level in the full glow of the cameras, but we need to provide support for communities in the Short Strand or at other flash-points. In that way people could work and deal with each other and make decisions together, which is very important. I know I am running out of time and I have only touched on a major topic. It bothers me when people feel that we are there. We are not. We have made major advances but there are significant problems. I want to say one thing about the dissident republicans. It appals me when people who kill other people for a political objective are described as republicans. It is a complete undermining 787 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Joe O’Toole.] of the Tone republicanism which we grew up to believe in. I do not know what to call it. It is some kind of out of control nationalism or chauvinism. It is not republicanism. Words are important in this situation because republican was always intended to be where Catholic, Prot- estant, dissenter and all others could share their own space and engage positively with each other. That is what we hope to achieve. I believe the Minister has done some service in that direction, as also have all the parties in the North. I was very impressed by the speech at a critical time made by the Deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness, MP, MLA, in which he outlined what he saw as his role in the North. It softened things and I would not take from the major input made by the SDLP over all those years also.

Senator Feargal Quinn: I second the amendment. Further to the words Senator O’Toole used to describe the Minister, I was reminded at this morning’s meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs where he explained why he was unable to attend some of those important meetings in Europe because he was so involved in Hillsborough at that time. It is a reminder of the work he put into it. I declare my own link with the North very clearly. My mother came from north County Armagh on the banks of Lough Neagh and my father came from south County Down. My only sister married a Portadown man. I have strong links with Northern Ireland. I only discovered in recent years how my mother and father met. He was working in Dún Laoghaire and tele- phoned home to Newry through the operator. He discovered that the operator in the post office in Dún Laoghaire had a northern accent. He chatted her up and made a blind date with her. When I mentioned this story in the post office in Dún Laoghaire I discovered that the book is still there and it states “left upon marriage” in my mother’s handwriting from 1931.

Deputy Micheál Martin: It shows the importance of tone, voice and dialect.

Senator Feargal Quinn: Exactly. The entire Northern Ireland thing is difficult to explain to anybody outside. Some years ago at a board meeting of the Food Marketing Institute in Chicago I was asked to explain Northern Ireland in seven minutes. It was just after the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. A number of people from North America said that they then understood for the first time. The explanation was basically one that people had not understood, which was that at the same time as North America was being settled by the settlers, mainly from England, the Ulster plantation took place. The Ulster plantation rewarded the soldiers from the other island with stretches of land. They took the best land in general and ousted those natives who happened to be of a different religion. People could not understand why we talk about fighting religions. It is not religions. It is traditions that are there and the ease with which people seem to believe there is a simple solution. The work that went into arriving at that solution last month is worthy of recognition and I am delighted we have done that today. It is interesting talking about it today. Some people are concerned that it is not an agreement. Certainly the SDLP has a concern that it is an arrangement rather than an agreement. It does not please everybody and that party is concerned because it might only be held together until the British general election scheduled to take place by May. On that basis it is quite concerned. The issue of parades is something that frightens both sides and on that basis it was very difficult to get an agreement or an arrangement, whatever one likes to call it. It is a problem that is not easily solved in any situation, but democracy is about trying to get two sides to agree on that basis. 788 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

I hope the recent developments in the North serve the purpose of starkly reminding us that we should not take it for granted that these things happen easily. The stability that has been achieved in the North is always difficult to maintain. However, it has changed and improved the lives of so many people up there. It is a very fragile situation and violence is never far away, as has been mentioned today. Our economic circumstances here make us blinkered to our own interests. However, we should do our utmost to support peace in the North. Opinion polls suggest there is popular support for power sharing in the North. Even if it may not be working ideally, it is clear that the public want differences to be resolved by debate rather than by violence. We have a challenge down here. Last week Senator Keaveney and I attended a round-table discussion hosted by the Institute for British-Irish Studies in the Royal Irish Academy. It was interesting to hear the views expressed there. Most of the discussion was on business and they talked about the objective of business being to try to get people together. I am very concerned that the further one goes from the Border, the more likely one is to be partitionist. I have a concern about those people who claim to buy Irish when referring to the Twenty-six Counties rather than the Thirty-two Counties. There have been and still are campaigns that exclude the North. As I have previously told the Minister, in my business approximately 18 years ago we established a system of encouraging people to buy Irish. We put shamrock labels in front of the products on display in the supermarket and we had a computer system that identified at the checkout how much a customer spent on Irish goods. What jolted me was the number of people in our own company who asked what they should do with something from Northern Ireland. It never entered my mind that there would be a question about whether we should regard something from Northern Ireland as not being Irish, yet that question was asked. It has happened so clearly in recent times with the amount of travel to the North because for various reasons a significant number of people are travelling from the South to the North, crossing the Border for the first time in many cases. Many people have called to say it is unpatriotic. I believe the Twenty-six Counties and the Six Counties are all Ireland. We must avoid having people believe it is somebody else. I have also previously told the story of going to buy a wedding present some years ago. I went to Kilkenny Design and picked a present for a couple getting married. I selected some linen. The Limerick person with me asked whether we should not buy some of our own. I asked what they meant. Were they suggesting my mother and father were not Irish? There is a mindset. I mentioned Limerick because it seems the further one gets from the Border, the more likely one is to regard those from the North as different and people we have not got to know. That is why I support the amendment so strongly. We are talking about not just a parliament but a civic forum, involving getting together, getting to know those across the Border and getting to regard the North as part of ourselves. If we can encourage more of our people on this side of the Border to get to travel to the North and more of those in the North to come to the South, then the more we get to know each other, the more likely it is we will be able to achieve success in that area. At the meeting last week I gave this example. Someone looking at the Iarnród Éireann website will discover that three hours away is the city of Cork, which is a fine city, and there are 15 trains per day to Cork. However, Belfast is a bigger city than Cork on the same island and yet there are only eight trains going there. Iarnród Éireann is responding to a need.

Senator Joe O’Toole: It is the same as the trains to Kerry.

Senator Pearse Doherty: And none to Donegal. 789 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

Senator Feargal Quinn: There are none to Donegal. I mention it because it is an interesting point. Those of us in Dublin in particular have not learnt that we are all-Ireland. We are one island. While more people travelling to the North to shop will present a major challenge to our economy——

Senator Cecilia Keaveney: We are in north Donegal.

Senator Feargal Quinn: Last week Senator Keaveney said she comes from north of Northern Ireland, which she does, of course. The more we regard Northern Ireland as somewhere else that we do not regard as part of our own, the bigger the problem we have. We must find some way to ensure that does not happen. I wish to make one further point in support of the amendment. The Seanad has benefited from and been helped greatly in the past by those of its Members from Northern Ireland. Before my time Seamus Mallon was here. In my time, Gordon Wilson was the first such Member I knew. The day before I came here for the first time 17 years ago, Gordon Wilson phoned me because I was the only one in the House he knew. I showed him around even though I had only been shown around the day before. I think of the likes of Gordon Wilson, then later Sam McAughtry and Maurice Hayes in more recent years. I wrote down the names a few minutes ago, just in case I forgot them. I am disappointed that just at the moment we do not have any Member from Northern Ireland. The only way this can happen until such time as there is a reformed Seanad is by way of a Taoiseach’s nomination. However, I urge that in the future the Taoiseach’s nominees should include a representative from the North. There may be some other way of achieving this. There are those who say that people from the North do not have a vote here, but in fact Northern-based Trinity and NUI graduates have a vote in this House on that area. If a person is a joint graduate of Trinity and the NUI, then he or she has two votes. I mention this because I believe the Seanad can do something in this regard. The amendment we have tabled is to the effect that we should have at least one report each session. I appreciate the fact that the Minister and the Leader have accepted that. It reminds us that Northern Ireland is part of Ireland. We should welcome the fact that we regard the whole as one island. Let us avoid being partitionist, as we tend to be on occasions.

Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú: I dtosach is mian liom fáilte a chur roimh an Aire anseo agus tréaslú leis de bharr na hoibre atá déanta aige. Ar ndóigh thug sé gliondar croí dúinn gur éirigh chomh maith sin leis nuair a bhí na comhráite ar siúl sa Tuaisceart, agus buíochas mórleDia go bhfuil an dul chun cinn sin déanta. I compliment the Minister and the Taoiseach on the role they played in the recent negotiations. This was a prime example of democratic dialogue in action and we could not have imagined that happening some years ago. We should also compliment the British Prime Mini- ster on the role he played and the First Minister, Deputy First Minister and all the parties involved because, ultimately, we are still on a road to a conclusion and one shudders to think what might have happened had the talks not succeeded. While many people had given up at different stages of the negotiations, it was quite evident that the Minister, the Taoiseach and everyone directly involved were in for the long haul. We are dealing here with very complex issues. There are the historical, imaginary and symbolic issues to be considered, each one of which is important in its own right. It is interesting that we are succeeding less in compromising than coalescing in the different strands of the complex issues with which we are dealing. Again, I believe this should not be underestimated. I was particularly interested to learn today that Sammy Wilson, for instance, had a meeting with the Minister for Finance. They were discussing issues of mutual concern. I am sure there are so 790 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion many of those types of arrangements that never come to the fore. We have seen before when issues arose in Europe that both jurisdictions were prepared to work together for the good of all the island. There is no better example of such progress than Tourism Ireland. The fact that it is marketing the whole island sends out a message that I believe is very important, especially outside Ireland. We all remember the bad old days when Bord Fáilte was endeavouring to promote Ireland. It would have been doing a fantastic job, and then some incident would occur which meant that straight away all the work was wiped out. As a result the whole island suffered. It is interesting, then, that Tourism Ireland is working so well. We had its representatives before an Oireachtas committee last week where we discussed with them the opportunities and difficulties they envisage for the future. Interestingly, it was no longer issues in Northern Ireland that were foreseen as problem areas but rather world recession and its impact on both parts of the island. It was seen to be in our joint interest to work together and one felt that it was good that Tourism Ireland had been set up when it was. As I was watching the debate on the monitor, I saw that a number of speakers addressed the symbolic issues. In fact, Senator Donie Cassidy mentioned them as well. I am referring specifically to the issue of culture. Very often there is a misunderstanding here. I have had a number of experiences in recent times which were particularly edifying. Some year ago, during the peace process I invited David Irvine to some discussions and we assembled a group of 200 people. We had Tim Pat Coogan as a speaker and the discussions were chaired by the then Senator Martin Mansergh. The type of people who turned up were not the usual audience one might expect. They came from industrial and cultural backgrounds in the main. One thing we discovered was how much we had in common. Very often the heritage, which is so old, is much more unifying than the political divisions. We brought along the Hounds of Ulster, a new group that had come on the scene and which was involved in building bridges between both traditions. We also asked President Mary McAleese to attend. What was happening on stage was less interesting than the great session that took place afterwards in the bar where all those interests worked together. Two years ago I was contacted by Orange Order representatives in the North who wanted to come here to discuss with me how we might work more closely together because they said their traditions were weakening. A delegation came here to the Oireachtas and I brought them to the headquarters of Comhaltas CeoltóiríÉireann and chatted there with them on the common ground that existed. One of the best examples of progress I can give derives from the fact that I had letters, in another context, from the five political parties in Northern Ireland, from Sinn Féin to the DUP, asking that we bring Fleadh Cheoil na hÉireann north of the Border. If anybody had suggested 20 years ago that there could be any question of that happening, one would never have believed it. It was especially significant that each of the political parties was willing to welcome such an event in celebration of the diverse traditions and cultures. In effect, it would mean that some 250,000 people or thereabouts would gather together for nine days. One thing that is certain, wherever there is music and common cause, there is seldom division. The division may exist in the background, but it is not central to the activity itself. The reason I mention all those events is that I believe this is the best thing we can do to advance progress along the lines I have indicated. Ultimately, it is the small initiatives that are put in place over time that will be seen to be important rather than big developments. Some- times the less said about it, the better because there will be an organic development arising from that. Later on we can wonder where we came from because events will have occurred and we shall have seen that common cause.

791 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú.]

I have always regretted that the parades issue arose in the manner in which it did. Part of the problem might have been the way that parades had been perceived and presented in the past. If one sees a parade in the context of a celebration, festivity and so on, it will not cause the same ripple effect. My understanding from speaking to people in the North is that this is the way they want to see 12 July celebrated in future years. I would like to believe, therefore, that where the local people make the decisions, based on the great progress made under other particular headings, we shall see the parades able to continue in the future without giving offence to anyone. I very much agree with the point made by Senator Cummins about all political parties sharing in what has happened. We can all agree that had we not had a bipartisan policy on Northern Ireland down through the years, we would be having a different type of debate. The fact there was a unifying but non-threatening voice coming from here seeing itself as a facilitator was important. My great hope is that some day we will work together in a single structure on this island. I have not used the term “united Ireland” because terminology can often send out the wrong message. Bearing in mind all the areas in which we co-operate, I see no reason our Unionist friends and leaders should feel threatened in the future once we respect each other’s traditions. I hope some time in the future we can look on expanding the areas of co-operation. I always admired the Reverend Ian Paisley for the particular reason that one always knew what was on his mind and he spoke about it openly. In the future we should do likewise and endeavour to continue on the road to a final conclusion. What has happened in recent weeks has not harmed us but done us good. It has enabled us to reflect on what we have achieved, where we are and what we might achieve in the future.

Senator Alex White: I wish to share time with Senator Hannigan.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Alex White: I welcome the past two week’s developments in the North, especially what has been achieved in policing and justice. No society can hope to attain any form of normality or legitimacy without control of something as basic and fundamental as policing and justice issues. They go to the heart of the kind of consensus that any society needs to have and the type of contract people have with each other on how their society is run. It is a pity reaching the agreement took quite as long as it did. While I do not say that by way of criticism, it was frustrating at certain stages to see it dragging on for so long. It was unfortunate to see the issue of and, admittedly, the important and delicate issues tied up with the Parades Commission as the obstacle to agreement on the more fundamental question of policing and justice. It is, none the less, a great achievement that this stage has been reached. Congratulations are due to those individuals and parties, such as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Taoiseach and the British Government, who participated and brokered the agreement. We have been here before. My party leader made the point in the Lower House that there must have been half a dozen occasions in recent years when we said to ourselves that was the moment at which we moved on and normality could be attained in politics, public life and society in Northern Ireland. This was what people hoped for and I certainly did. The national question, as it is often called, or the constitutional imperative has been the fault line of politics in the North. Arguably, it was also the fault line in the South for many years too. While the seeking of a united Ireland is a noble and honourable objective, politics must 792 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion move on. The issues that preoccupy all the peoples of Northern Ireland, as they do us, are fundamentally social and economic. We cannot shirk from the fact there are different options and ways of approaching economic crises and change. People in this House have different views on how we should address those pressing issues. It is no longer credible, therefore, that the fault lines that divide people are those tied up with the constitutional question. Other Members raised the recent retirement of Mark Durkan as leader of the SDLP. That party has a proud tradition of upholding solid social and democratic politics, the kind I strongly support. Mark Durkan, a great exponent of this politics, has been a real politician, not just as a fearless and strong representative of his community but as someone who has brought forward real politics and options in respect of addressing economic issues, the most pressing that face any community. I wish Mark Durkan well in his retirement. I have known him personally for more than 30 years. We soldiered together as student politicians in the late 1970s and early 1980s when we were both rookies at the game. In the past ten years, he has achieved a huge amount as leader of the SDLP. He will continue to make a huge contribution as an MP. Senator Quinn recalled the contributions to the process made by various Taoiseach-nomi- nated Senators from the North and how they brought a special element into debates in the House. I know Mark Durkan has a position in another parliament but I would hope he might be considered a suitable Member of this House in the future. I know a Taoiseach’s nominee seat is free at the moment and somebody probably has their eye on it. It is a pity we cannot use it to avail of the knowledge and expertise of some people from the North. I believe Margaret Ritchie will make a terrific leader of the SDLP and will uphold social democratic politics, seeking to foster them in the future.

Senator Dominic Hannigan: I thank Senator Alex White for providing me with 180 seconds from his time slot. I compliment the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the fine work he did over recent weeks to ensure this agreement occurred. I met the various leaders in Stormont in December and appreciate the personal journey many of them went on to reach this agreement and recognise the difficulties they faced. It is certainly another step on the road to a long and lasting peace. It cannot, however, be taken for granted. Many Members will have seen last night’s “Prime Time” which contained interviews with various dissident republican groups. There is still an element that will try to wreck this peace so none of us can rest on our laurels. Further work is needed to ensure peace remains. Difficulties with parades and policing must be faced. We must examine the issue of how the Northern Ireland Executive is formed and the existing d’Hondt mechanism that ensures it fairly represents the number of seats each party has. By and large it works well but there is a deficit in SDLP representation on the Executive. I pay tribute to the SDLP’s former leader, Mark Durkan, for his sterling work during his tenure. We must examine how we can deepen the links between North and South. In the tourism sector, there is the potential to attract visitors from the North to the South. In County Meath each year more than 100,000 people from the North visit the Battle of the Boyne site and others such as Newgrange. With peace on the island it will be easier to sell international tourism. I recall when in the United States 20 years ago people refused to visit Ireland because all they knew of it was that it was, in their words, a battle zone. It is to be hoped the long and lasting peace will ensure more tourists come north and south of the Border. We must consider a deepening of our joint development of green energy, especially wind energy and wave power. We are an island nation and we have an excellent coastline. We must 793 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Dominic Hannigan.] consider ways to ensure North and South can avail of any green jobs that materialise. I welcome the recent agreement and I support the amendment tabled by the Independent Senators.

Senator Ann Ormonde: I wish to share three minutes of my time with Senator Norris. I thank the Minister for updating the Seanad on this important matter. I congratulate the Minister and the Taoiseach on the effort, energy and commitment to bring this agreement to fruition. I warmly welcome the recent agreement reached at Hillsborough and look forward to its full implementation. Since we have reached an accommodation on these complex issues, there may be an opportunity to focus on and give our full attention to the issues of most concern to people throughout Ireland, including issues related to sharing health and education services, hospital, cancer and general practitioner services and school transport in rural and Border areas. These are major issues requiring all-Ireland thinking. We have a shared message on such issues as road safety, suicide prevention and obesity. We should pool our resources to deal with these issues to ensure we attain the best value and that we achieve full co-operation North and South. This is the way to tackle the problem. We must think on an all-Ireland basis. I acknowledge the Government has made its contribution by upgrading the road between Derry and Letterkenny last year. That was a project developed under the north-west gateway initiative. An alliance has developed on the education front between the Letterkenny Institute of Technology and the University of Ulster. These are fine examples of what is taking place in the north west and we must continue to work in this area. I acknowledge the support of the EU for the peace process which we rarely acknowledge and much credit is due. We should not be slow to acknowledge the extent to which the EU has supported the cause of peace, reconciliation and cross-Border economic growth in Ireland. It is very important to progress the North South parliamentary forum, a key to continued progress. We have held consultative fora, including a very good conference last October chaired by the Taoiseach which reflected the role of the social partners and community groups. This is the way forward. We must involve the people on the ground, not those at the top layer. That has already take place and it is now time to acknowledge that this is an all-Ireland process. I refer to economic issues. We must consider the role of agencies south of the Border such as Enterprise Ireland and the Northern equivalent, Invest Northern Ireland. There are opportunities in this area and we should plan trade missions in Ireland and pool our resources in this area. Political progress has been made during the past 15 years and it is great that we have accommodated the complex issues. It is to be hoped this will ensure stability, but the real test will be for politicians on all sides to get down to the brass tacks of working with the people. As other speakers have remarked, we must include the civic forum in the way forward as a way to represent the people as a whole, not only people at the top. I refer to North-South co-operation and east-west co-operation through the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. We must work on such bodies and work more to strengthen the North-South axis. This is an all-Ireland process and we should begin to think in that way. We are moving in that direction. I compliment the Minister who has a great grasp of these issues. I have listened to the Minister as the debate has unfolded. I appreciate the amount of time and work he has put in to reflect our view in terms of where we go from here. I wish the Minister well in carrying out this good work in the North. I acknowledge it is important to have regular updates, to which the Minister has agreed, and the Chamber should be used increasingly to reflect such thinking. If this takes place we will make the Chamber worthwhile as a real place for contributions to get the North-South forum working and up and running. 794 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

Senator David Norris: I thank my colleague, Senator Ann Ormonde, for a remarkable display of cross-bench co-operation. This is one of the spirits we need in the North of Ireland: the spirit of genuine co-operation, and I am unsure whether it is always there. I share the admiration expressed by Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú for the remarkable performance of Senator Cassidy, particularly in displaying his reading skills. That said, I suggest that the next time a little additional punctuation might be added by whoever prepares the script because it is a little disconcerting when one stops on a preposition or a conjunction. Still, some admirable senti- ments were involved, especially the emphasis on culture. We must be realistic as well as co-operative. Ulster-Scots is not a language under any circumstances. I know a certain amount about languages and I know how one defines them. It is a dialect. It is quite an interesting dialect, but merely a dialect. Such is the massaging that takes place. Since the Shinners and the Irish speakers get €3 million, the other side must be balanced up. I realise these things must be done but let us be honest about it and let us not pretend it is anything more than this. I was greatly struck by Senator Keaveney’s remarks about the road. She referred to “our road”. If we can make it so and make such events a celebration and not a triumphalism, then all these parades should be possible. There should be no problem with them. Historically, there has been and this has been partly due to demographic change. Now parades are going through areas that are strongly Nationalist and Catholic, but in the past such areas were not so. These demographic shifts must be accommodated within the tribal certainties, a very difficult thing to achieve. The Administration in Northern Ireland is a very extraordinary, unusual and unnatural flower. There is no opposition and although I welcome it, it is a massaged situation. It is remarkable to see people who previously called each other bigots and murderers sitting down in Cabinet together to discuss matters to the benefit of the country and both their communities. At the same time, this should be only a transitional period because democracy will not really flourish in the North until there is proper oppositional politics. I refer to the matter of roads. Some years ago, I was up on the Ormeau Road as an independent observer and I heard the drums. However, there are drums on both sides. I was horrified by the intimidation in the North. I did not know what the immediate beating meant but it is a tribal, savage, ritualistic thing. However, I heard the drums down here during the H-block hunger strikes. They were peas in a pod, exactly the same thing. They must be disinfected from the tribalism and become a cultural matter. I very much welcome the fact that Senator Pearse Doherty is present representing Sinn Féin. It is an excellent thing. For many years I campaigned against section 31 of the Broadcasting Act. I believed it was a mistake and, unlike Senator O’Toole, I find I have quite a lot in common with that party because its members are the remains of what I would term the hard left and there is a place in Irish politics for them. They really take issue on such matters as trade unionism in terms of international politics. Today, I met the new Colombian Ambassador appointed to London as, I am sure, did the Minister. I raised the question of trade unions and the extraordinary murder of trade unionists. Some 60% of murders of trade unionists throughout the planet happen in Colombia and there was a 25% increase in 2008. The ambassador was very skilful and charming at massaging those figures too. On the website of the President and the foreign ministry there is a notice suggesting the Minister for Foreign Affairs wrote to the Colombian President and indicated there was no need to bother with the trade union affairs and that although they were lobbying like hell, actually he was supportive of the free trade agreement. 795 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

Deputy Micheál Martin: Who said that?

Senator David Norris: It is on the websites of the Colombian President and foreign ministry, and it simply shows what can happen with massaging. Perhaps the Minister will be able to correct it.

Deputy Micheál Martin: The Senator knows full well what we are doing on that and we will communicate with him, as we have communicated with Senators up to now.

Senator David Norris: This is why I say it.

Deputy Micheál Martin: The Senator should be careful about articulating what may be misin- formation.

Senator David Norris: Exactly.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I do not believe the Senator should give it the status he is giving it now.

Senator David Norris: No, but I wish to give the Minister the opportunity to contradict it and I am very glad he has done so. I hope he will return to the matter in his speech because this is an important aside and it deals with the whole area of political massaging. In the same vein, the German Foreign Minister stated there would be a European army. The Minister and I know there will be over our dead bodies.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach: The Senator should conclude.

Senator David Norris: It is very good we have this situation at the moment and of course there should be strong co-operation. I am astonished by the people who want a 32-county republic but who object to people buying their goods in Newry. Their argument is that it is part of a different economic regime. I am all in favour of revisionism. We need a little more of it. People who were regarded as revisionist historians in the State were attacked as if revisionism were some kind of intellectual weakness. It is not; it is an intellectual strength. If new facts are presented, any intelligent person must accommodate them. I hope the kind of revisionism that has taken 7o’clock place in the South will start to take place in the North. It seems it is beginning because I have heard Unionists in the broadcast media saying they now understand there is an inevitability about a united Ireland. I never believed I would hear Unionists say that, nor did I believe I would feel my own heart chime in agreement, but there is a lot more massaging to be done before we get to that time. We will support everything done in the interest of people not losing their lives and not being mutilated or blown up. We will continue in a united way to condemn the activities of the various ridiculous and disgraceful splinter organisations which, as Senator O’Toole said, continue to murder fellow Irish people in the name of republicanism, a brand that they blemish with their activities.

Senator Paul Bradford: I support the motion and the amendment. I also welcome the Mini- ster to the House. Senator Norris’s final remarks summed up the position appropriately. He stated we had moved from the bomb, the bullet and divisiveness. When I reflect on the number of debates we have had in both Houses in the past 20 years, I realise it is tremendous that we do not now have to preface our remarks in every political debate on Northern Ireland with words of 796 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion condemnation of the previous night’s atrocity. Whenever we spoke about political circumstances in Northern Ireland in the late 1980s and early and mid-1990s, we were generally responding to some atrocity, murder or explosion. However, because of the great work done by so many on all sides, we have moved beyond this. I welcome the recent agreement between the parties and the two Governments. Perhaps I am too optimistic but I always felt an arrangement would be arrived at. I never liked using the words “settlement” or “solution” in regard to the Northern Ireland conflict or debate because the idea that there is some “Solution” to all of the problems is fraught with danger. In the politics of Northern Ireland one man’s solution is another man’s difficulty. We must, therefore, move with caution, care, empathy and sympathy. This is why the process in the past decade or so has been generally successful. One could reasonably argue that it would be preferable if there was more progress and that there should be greater political responsibility within Northern Ireland. I do not want to dispute this but we must ask where we are and were coming from. When moving from a conflict that is not only decades but generations old, we must appreciate and respect that progress comes slowly. While we must also respect everybody’s long-term view on where they would like Northern Ireland to be as a political entity, we must be happy with progress made in small steps. Small steps do not threaten but so-called “Settlements” can be very worrying for those from different backgrounds who have different views on what the future should hold. I am not sure how long the Minister will be in the Department or in government and I am not making——

Senator Cecilia Keaveney: At least another five years.

Senator Paul Bradford: As my colleagues know, I am not into making silly political points. I hope that in the course of the Minister, Deputy Michéal Martin’s time in the Department of Foreign Affairs or that of his successor there will be ongoing dialogue and changes regarding the political arrangements in Northern Ireland in so far as they affect the Republic and Great Britain. It is necessary that changes be made in small steps. This will allow people to feel much more comfortable and bring them along. I welcome the progress made. We look forward to seeing the arrangement working on the ground. I listened with interest to Senator Quinn who talked about everyday engagement between people on both sides of the Border. We have great progress to make in this respect. During the years at meetings of my party, be it a branch or constituency meeting, with ten, 50 or 100 people present, as a little experiment I used to ask who had been to various places. When I asked how many had been to the United States, virtually every hand went up; when I asked how many had been to Berlin, 80% went up, but when I asked how many had been to Belfast, very few went up. We had and still have a slight mental block about travelling to Northern Ireland and engaging with its people. We must make progress in this regard. When I was a member of a local authority, I often expressed my bemusement to the Mini- ster’s predecessors about signs indicating certain villages were twinned with certain towns in France. Some 95% of the landmass of Brittany appears to be twinned with some part of the island of Ireland, which is all very laudable. Some place is twinned with Nova Scotia, while another is twinned with Auckland. On the initiative of the Department of Foreign Affairs and with the active engagement of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, there should be a much greater effort to twin towns, villages and parishes, particularly small ones, in the South with similar entities in Northern Ireland. When I raised this matter in the Seanad some years ago, one of the Minister’s colleagues – I am thankful I forget 797 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Paul Bradford.] who – was particularly upset and said one part of the island of Ireland should not be twinned with another because it would be acknowledging the Border. We must think beyond this. It would be nice if people in Mallow had more dialogue with people in Magherafelt and if Skib- bereen had its eye on Portadown or other such town rather than on Russia. That would be a very small step but it would allow a useful exchange of views between people on both sides of the Border. It is a question of allowing them to be more comfortable with each other. The first time I went to Northern Ireland as a politician was probably when I was going to attend a conference organised by the SDLP held somewhere outside Belfast. I decided to stay the night before in Dundalk in the belief it was much safer and more comfortable physically and mentally, rather than park my car on the streets of Belfast. That was negative thinking but it was shared by many across the island. It may still be shared by too many and we must distance ourselves from it. The only way to do this is by having more contact, meetings and dialogue. While the putting in place of a political settlement in the North is very important, on which I commend all those concerned who were led by the Minister, we still have a long way to go to build the invisible bridges between the North and South. Senator Norris referred to shopping in Northern Ireland. It almost became a capital sin before Christmas to shop in Newry. While there was an economic argument to be considered and ministerial responsibility and budgetary policy could be faulted, it was a little ironic, as Senator Norris stated, that some of those in favour of a united Ireland wanted to keep the Border. Senator Keaveney will know this.

Senator Cecilia Keaveney: It only became an issue recently but it has been ongoing for generations.

Senator Paul Bradford: It is great that we are debating this profound, lengthy and at times horrific problem in the light of a much more peaceful Northern Ireland and a much more politically co-operative solution. When one thinks of the journeys travelled by the so-called extremists, one notes this progress is one of the great miracles of our time. Colleagues in both Houses are privileged to be in a place of political dialogue at a time when such enormous steps are being taken towards peace. When history is written, the debates on the Celtic tiger, who bred it and caused it to disappear will be regarded as pathetic little footnotes. The real script on Irish history in the 1990s and the new millennium will concern the progress we made on political developments in Northern Ireland. All parties concerned can take great credit for the difference these developments have made to people’s lives.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Micheál Martin): Ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil leis na Seanadóirí as ucht an chuiridh a chur siad romhaim agus toisc go bhfuil an díospóireacht seo ar siúl. Is ceist an-thábhachtach ar fad í agus admhaím go bhfuil tuairimí na Seanadóirí rí- thábhachtach ar fad. Gan amhras, beimid ag éisteacht leo agus ag déanamh scrúdú ar an méid atá ráite acu go dtí seo. I welcome this opportunity to speak to the Seanad on the peace process in Northern Ireland and the agreement reached in Hillsborough on 5 February. As Senators will be aware, the agreement represented the culmination of many hours of intensive negotiations and engagement on all sides. It provides the basis for the future stability and success of the democratic institutions which we all have worked so hard to create and maintain. When we most recently discussed developments in Northern Ireland in this House on 3 November last, I began by recalling that many of the breakdowns and delays and the loss of momentum in the peace process in the last decade had been caused by a failure to fully implement the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. The St. Andrews Agreement and now 798 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion the Hillsborough agreement are essentially further implementation agreements building on the framework and vision contained in the Good Friday Agreement. I use this opportunity to call on all of the parties in Northern Ireland to seize the opportunity to break the cycle of stop- start implementation of these agreements. I am confident that the public consultation process that the First Minister and Deputy First Minister have just launched will demonstrate that the vast majority of people in the North want their political leaders to take forward with confidence and determination this latest agreement and implement it in full and on time. If I can add to the phrase used by the Northern Ireland Minister for Finance and Personnel, Mr. Sammy Wilson, MP, MLA, this needs to be a made and implemented in Ulster deal. The Taoiseach was right when he stated in Hillsborough that what was needed was a return to the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement. I also agree with the Rt. Hon. Rev. Ian Paisley, MP, MLA, who wrote in the Belfast Newsletter last week: “What is important now is that the deal is enacted ... If the deal is worthy, own it, don’t ambush it”. The motion acknowledges the Government’s role in brokering the agreement. I want to take a few moments to explain what the role of the Government and that of the two Governments were in helping to facilitate the Hillsborough agreement. It was clear from early September last year that the Northern Ireland parties, in particular, the DUP and Sinn Féin, were having increasing difficulty in agreeing how to move ahead with the devolution of policing and justice powers which was long overdue. This was caused partly by and at the same time contributed to a wider breakdown in the good functioning of the Northern Ireland Executive. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Rt. Hon. Shaun Woodward, MP, and I began to meet more regularly throughout the autumn as the two Governments intensified their efforts to encourage and assist the parties to resolve, between them, outstanding issues that would enable the devolution of policing and justice to proceed and in the process restore the working relationships at the heart of the power-sharing Northern Ireland Executive. The Taoiseach and the British Prime Minster, Mr. Brown, MP, were also in frequent contact throughout this period and the two Governments were in regular contact with the main parties. Widespread public awareness of the impending breakdown only emerged in December, but by then the two Governments had further intensified their efforts to assist the parties, with a meeting between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister on 17 December, at which they set out clearly the firm view of the two Governments that a reasonable agreement on the early devolution of policing and justice powers and related outstanding issues from St. Andrew’s was achievable. It was clear to the two Governments at that point that there was only a number of weeks at the most for the parties to come to an agreement or else the institutions would be under threat of collapse. The aim of the two Governments throughout this phase was to encourage and assist the parties to reach agreement, but also to be prepared to intervene if the point was reached where it was clear that the parties no longer had the capacity to resolve their differences on their own. When the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister, accompanied by me and the Secretary of State, met in Downing Street on the morning of 25 January, we had anticipated that the moment to intervene had arrived and we proceeded to Hillsborough to convene all-party talks. Our role was not to impose or dictate solutions but to facilitate and encourage the parties to reach agreement. The point of departure for us was the need to continue to deliver full implementation of the Good Friday and St Andrew’s Agreements. In the first three intensive days the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister worked with the parties to begin to restore trust between them, to focus on the reasonable basis that the Governments knew was in place for an agreement on the way forward and to encourage the parties to re-engage directly with each other on the core issues. Progress was slow in this first phase, but it provided the basis for the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister to release their statement on the afternoon of 27 January, setting out what they believed to be a fair and 799 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Deputy Micheál Martin.] reasonable basis for agreement and setting a deadline of Friday, 29 January, for the parties to reach agreement or the two Governments would publish their own proposals. The second phase of the talks, led by me and the Secretary of State, built on the progress that had been made. We focused on facilitating the parties to re-establish trust and increase their confidence that both sides had the political will to do the deal which the two Governments believed was achievable and, on that basis, to increasingly take forward the serious discussions directly with each other. Once we were confident serious progress was being made, the two Governments deferred publication of their proposals to allow the parties the time and space to take forward their negotiations. What I might call the third phase was very much about Sinn Féin and the DUP negotiating and concluding the text that was published with the full support and encouragement of the two Governments at Hillsborough on 5 February. It is important to realise that the political context for the recent talks was very different from any that had gone before. While these talks were convened and facilitated by the two Governments, in the end they were primarily conducted between the parties in Northern Ireland because, unlike on previous occasions, we have had fully functioning democratic institutions throughout the recent period of political turbulence. The members of the Northern Ireland Executive have now held office for longer than any of their predecessors since Good Friday 1998. While the two Governments have an essential role in upholding the agreements and a continuing role in supporting the institutions and the parties as they move forward, it is the parties which had to come to an agreement on this occasion. Both the DUP and Sinn Féin attached significant importance to the fact that it was their deal, done in the end between the two main parties. This was how it had to be. The political reality, determined by the electorate at the last Northern Ireland Assembly elections, is that the DUP and Sinn Féin are the leading parties. Based on the democratic judgment of the electorate, they provide the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and, between them, can command cross-community support in the Northern Ireland Assembly. However, both the First Minister, the Rt. Hon. Peter Robinson, MP, MLA, and the Deputy First Minister, Mr. Martin McGuinness, MP, MLA, acknowledged that it was important that there was broad support for the deal, in particular, from the other political parties in the Assembly. In the final plenary, co-chaired by the British Prime Minister and the Taoiseach on 5 February, they made clear their willingness to discuss all elements of the deal with the other parties. With the views articulated by Senators tonight, I urge them to continue to work more closely with the other parties in the future. In that regard, I welcome the proposals for improving the workings of the Northern Ireland Executive and greater discussion with the other parties which are part of the agreement. I very much welcome the decision by Sir Reg Empey, MLA, and Ms Margaret Ritchie, MLA, to chair the working group provided for in the Hillsborough agreement to review the functioning of the Northern Ireland Executive and come up with proposals for improvements. I congratulate all of the parties around the table which contributed to the positive outcome reached on 5 February. The leadership displayed by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and their respective party colleagues was instrumental in achieving the agreement reached. It still takes considerable political will and leadership to reach out beyond the comfort zones on either side to occupy the shared space where progress and accommodation are to be found. That political will and leadership re-emerged during the long hours we all spent in Hillsbor- ough. I pay tribute and give full credit to the Sinn Féin and DUP negotiating teams for this achievement. The DUP and Sinn Féin occupy a joint office which is at the heart of devolved government in the North; thus their capacity to engage with each other and reach accommodation is crucial to the stability of the institutions. The fact that they, facilitated by the two 800 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

Governments, have been able to conclude this comprehensive agreement around a number of contentious and sensitive issues is a major step forward. I also acknowledge the wisdom of and leadership shown by all of the other party leaders — Sir Reg Empey, MLA; Mr. Mark Durkan, MP, MLA; Mr. David Ford, MLA, and Ms Dawn Purvis, MLA — and their teams in the part that they played. It is very important that all of the Northern Ireland Assembly parties get behind this deal, contribute to its delivery and make the devolved institutions work for all of the people they represent. I take the opportunity to show my special appreciation to the former SDLP leader, Mr. Mark Durkan, for all that he has done to help build peace, prosperity and reconciliation.

Senator Paschal Mooney: Hear, hear.

Deputy Micheál Martin: I have known him for a long time. Like Senator Alex White, I was a student leader in the 1980s when I first met him. He has made an enormous contribution and he has much more to contribute to political life in the future. I also wish to congratulate Margaret Ritchie on her election and to wish her every success in her new role as SDLP leader. The Taoiseach and I met with Margaret Ritchie and the new deputy leader, Patsy McGlone, and Alex Attwood in Dublin last week, and we look forward to working with them in the future. Everyone on these islands owes a debt of gratitude to the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP for their courage and leadership in concluding the Good Friday Agreement. This process is very much their creation and I encourage them to continue their support for this current phase of delivery. In the time available I will review briefly the main elements of the Hillsborough agreement and note the progress that has already been made in its implementation. The Hillsborough agreement provides for a cross-community vote in the Assembly to request the devolution of policing and justice powers on 9 March and the completion of the devolution of policing and justice by 12 April. This will be an essential step for peace, stability and security in Northern Ireland. It will consolidate the operation of devolved government and close the circle in the transformation of policing and justice structures in Northern Ireland. The appointment of a Minister for Justice, accountable to the Northern Ireland Assembly, will signal a strong vote of confidence in the robustness and sustainability of the devolved institutions. The agreement also provides for a way forward on parades based on cross community support for an enhanced framework. This offers the prospect of respecting and equitably balancing the rights of everybody. While most parades pass off peacefully each year, there remain a handful of contentious parades and another few which retain the potential for difficulty. The core point is that any enhanced framework would have at its core the principles of local people providing local solutions and respect for the rights of those who parade and those who live in the areas through which parades pass. This includes the right for everyone to be free from sectarian harassment. Until new arrangements have been agreed and put in place, the Parades Commission will continue to do its valuable work. An ambitious timeframe has been set for this work. The First and Deputy First Minister have appointed representatives to the working group provided for in the Hillsborough agreement. This working group is now meeting on a daily basis and will report back with agreed outcomes within two weeks. These outcomes will, in turn, provide the basis for widespread public consultation, leading to responsibility for parading being devolved to the Northern institutions and Assembly legislation before the end of the year. The agreement between the parties to move forward on an agreed basis has the potential to transform the situation, lifting the stresses and pressure on communities arising from parades. Realising this potential will require generosity of spirit and respect for others on the part of all stakeholders. There is also a duty 801 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Deputy Micheál Martin.] of care on those who take this work forward to ensure the rights of all are equitably accommodated. The Government will remain close to this process as it progresses through the various stages. The Hillsborough agreement also provides for a working group to be established on outstanding commitments from the St. Andrews Agreement. One commitment of particular interest to this House concerns the Irish language. The Good Friday Agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement recognised the importance of respect, tolerance and understanding of the linguistic diversity and culture of Northern Ireland. The Irish Government is committed to assisting the development of the Irish language in Northern Ireland and the implementation of outstanding commitments made in the St. Andrews Agreement, including an Irish Language Act. We also look forward to early agreement on an Irish language strategy. Since language issues are a devolved matter, this is an area where the Government works directly with the Northern Ireland Executive, including through the North-South body, Foras na Gaeilge. Engagement continues with the British Government on relevant non-devolved areas such as broadcasting and through the British Irish Council. I am pleased that the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Eamon Ryan, and his British counterpart recently signed a memorandum of understanding which will facilitate the continued availability of Irish television services, including TG4, in Northern Ireland after the digital switch-over. As the House will be aware, the promotion and protection of the Irish language is a key priority for the Irish Government in this jurisdiction and our work in this area can have a positive effect on the island as a whole. The 20 year strategy for the Irish language, 2010-2030, will have a beneficial impact on speakers of the Irish language on the whole island and the Irish Government will look at how these synergies can be optimised. This is where we can be creative and apply some of the more creative solutions in the 20 year strategy for the benefit of Irish language speakers in Northern Ireland. I reiterate the need for tolerance and respect for both the Irish language and the Ulster Scots language and culture in Northern Ireland. I accept the points made by Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú and Senator Cecilia Keaveney regarding the role of culture and respect for culture. I have previously urged a more open approach to the Irish language by those who erroneously see it as something threatening. Far from being feared, the languages and cultures of this island ought to be shared and celebrated. I look forward to a more mature and less politicised discussion about the Irish language, building on the improved dynamic and mutual respect that enabled agreement to be reached in Hillsborough last week. In moving forward, we must build and consolidate trust between communities, in a spirit of equality and tolerance for each other’s political aspirations, cultural expression and inheritance. Much has already been achieved in building sustainable relationships where once there was mistrust. However, more must be done to knock down the barriers which physically and meta- phorically separate too many in the North. Again, I accept the views expressed by Senators about the community-based interface. We have done, and continue to do, much work on that. We have not pulled back at all in this jurisdiction. In fact, our funding has been maintained in terms of the reconciliation and anti-sectarianism funds. This is something I am very keen on, and perhaps I could discuss it as a specific item with Senators on another occasion. We could discuss how we could really work on the community issue and particularly what are described as the hard-to-reach areas. The social and economic indices are still shocking in many areas and until the British and Irish Governments and the Executive collectively move in a comprehensive way to tackle the issues in those communities, we will not put in the underpinning that is essential to sustain the political edifice that has been created through the agreements. That 802 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion is an issue of great interest to me and I have spoken to all and sundry about it and the need to concentrate in those areas. The Hillsborough agreement provides a new platform upon which we can build stronger and deeper North-South co-operation over the months and years to come. I appreciate the work Senator Quinn has done in that regard with the British Irish Association, and the work he did yesterday and last evening, as well as Senator O’Toole’s work on the ad hoc committee. I will take on board the suggestions they have made; they will find us open and willing to advance them. The point is well made about the North-South Ministerial Council and the lack of awareness outside of those participating, even in this House, of the progress that has been made. There have been more than 50 meetings of the North-South Ministerial Council since the restoration of the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly in May 2007. Every one of those meetings has included Ministers from the Unionist and Nationalist traditions in Northern Ireland, as well as their Irish Government counterparts. This is a hugely significant level of engagement between elected representatives in both parts of the island on the economic and social issues of most concern to those we represent. The era of “back-to-back” development has truly been consigned to the past. Ministers, North and South, no longer hesitate to pick up the telephone or meet in person, discuss common challenges, argue options and agree shared approaches to the difficulties we face. That is politics as it should be. The political compromises reached at Hillsborough will free up time and space to tackle the bread-and-butter issues of most concern to ordinary people. The Government is determined to work closely with our Northern Ireland Executive colleagues to tackle those issues on an all-island basis, wherever possible and helpful. We will continue to take a North-South approach to meeting the infrastructural needs of the island, as evidenced by our support for the upgrading to dual carriageway status of the new A5 road to Derry and Letterkenny. We are increasing our efforts to build a smart and dynamic “Innovation Island” by increasing our collaboration through the US-Ireland Research and Development Partnership and under the EU’s seventh framework programme. We are inten- sifying our co-operation in areas such as health and education, with North-South studies completed or in train on how we can achieve economies of scale and deliver improved services. We look forward to examining closely with our Northern Ireland Executive colleagues ways in which both our Administrations can save money by eliminating duplication on the island. It is simple common sense that we can do more together, for less, if we pool our talents, resources and time in the many areas in which we have shared ambitions and targets. We look forward to completing the St. Andrews Agreement review of North-South bodies and areas of co-operation as soon as possible, ensuring Ministers can address issues of most pressing concern through the North-South Ministerial Council. We are also determined to bring into being the North-South Consultative Forum and the North-South Parliamentary Forum, which will each have a valuable role in advising the Government and the Northern Ireland Executive on socio-economic and cultural issues with a North-South dimension. The time is now right to make progress on all these outstanding issues and we look forward to doing just that over the months ahead. In moving forward on these critical matters I believe that the parties have recovered the spirit of the Good Friday and St. Andrews Agreements, the vision of a better future for all the people of these islands. It is about people coming to the table with a sense of generosity and understanding, accommodating the views and opinions of others and doing so in a way that best serves everyone in the community and promotes security, stability and support for democracy. The devolved institutions can now move on to focus on the day-to-day issues that concern everyone, such as the economy, jobs, health, education, infrastructure, social services, com- 803 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Deputy Micheál Martin.] munity safety and quality of life. That better future must be built on mutual respect for people of all different traditions, equality and tolerance, and respect for each others’ political aspirations and cultural expression and inheritance. As we mark this month’s deadline for paramilitary decommissioning, it is worth taking stock of the great degree of success there has been in taking the gun out of politics in Northern Ireland. Recent acts of decommissioning remind us all of the great benefits the peace process can bring and the confidence it generates in communities. This Government has expressed its appreciation for those who worked so hard to bring about the decommissioning by the UDA. I also welcome the recent confirmation by the INLA and other groups that they have put their weapons beyond use. Their recognition that politics is the only way forward is to be welcomed. Sadly, the evil, criminal attack on PSNI Constable Peadar Heffron in recent weeks is a stark reminder that there remain a tiny, unrepresentative few whose aim is to destroy all that has been achieved. I pay tribute to Constable Heffron for all that he has done for this country and for his bravery in dealing with what I know are significant injuries. It is very important we place our deep appreciation and our best wishes for Constable Peadar Heffron and his family firmly on the record of this House.

Senators: Hear, hear.

Deputy Micheál Martin: Such attacks by so-called dissident republicans do not represent the democratic will of the people on this island. They offer nothing but pain and suffering to the people. The best response to give to such persons is to complete the devolution of policing and justice powers to secure the stability of the democratic institutions and to show that politics is delivering for all the people of Northern Ireland. All the people of these islands greatly value what has been achieved in the North in recent years. They have no wish to see a return to the bad old days. It is the duty of all political leaders on this island to continue working together in trust and partnership to ensure we continue on the path of peace. I pay tribute to my counterpart, the Secretary of State, Shaun Woodward. He and I have worked together to secure the devolution of policing and justice, not just for the past two weeks but for the past 18 months. His commitment has been extraordinary and I thank him for it. On the proposed amendment to the motion, I have already set out our position on the North- South Consultative Forum. On reports to the Seanad on the work of the North-South Minis- terial Council, I and my colleagues in the Government are always available to participate in the proceedings of Seanad Éireann and I very much welcome this discussion. I agree with the House fully on the importance of discussing the North-South Ministerial Council and North- South issues generally in the Oireachtas. The support of elected representatives is essential to ensure broad public understanding of our efforts to promote all-island approaches and deliver shared services in Border areas. That view has been articulated by Senators in this debate. Senator Keaveney put it graphically in terms of the multiple heads and tails we each thought the other had. One should never underestimate the importance of shared experience and meeting people. Before I was a Minister, as a back bench Deputy I was a member of the British-Irish Associ- ation and attended conferences in Cambridge and Oxford every year. I met politicians from different backgrounds in the North. I had a very interesting experience in 1992 when a group of Deputies and Senators travelled to Ballycastle to meet Unionist politicians, including David Irvine, Billy Hutchinson and the McGimpsey brothers, whom I met before. I would never understate the influence the encounter had on me in terms of understanding the perspective of Unionist politicians, where they were coming from and their ability to understand where we 804 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion were coming from. The more continued collaboration and engagement we have, the better because it comes in useful. It came in useful for me during the two weeks I spent in Hillsbor- ough and I have maintained that level of engagement and contact throughout my life in politics. It is important that all public representatives do likewise because one never knows the hour when it will become useful. We have to keep working at all levels within the community. On the North-South situation, I was happy to have had the opportunity to brief members of the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement last July on the discussions which had taken place at the NSMC plenary meeting on 6 July. As I said on that occasion, I would be glad to address the joint committee after each NSMC plenary meeting at the convenience of the committee. It is also open to committees to invite my ministerial colleagues to discuss NSMC activities in their areas of responsibility. North-South issues have also been the subject of useful debate on the Adjournment of the House. It is open to the Seanad to discuss any aspect of North-South co-operation, including meetings of the NSMC. I am genuinely taken by the very fine contributions of the Members of the House to the debate which ranged from the importance of music, culture and the arts to better relationships between North and South and communities. Senator Keaveney, with her musical background, has a very clear commitment to that and I value the reports she has prepared and is currently preparing. Senator Ó Murchú outlined a fascinating exchange between members of the Orange Order and Comhaltas CeoltóiríÉireann, which is the kind of engagement which makes a difference. The contribution of Senator Quinn is important, as he reminded us that the further south one goes, the more partitionist one can become. I was uncomfortable with the discussion——

Senator Cecilia Keaveney: Is that the people’s republic?

Deputy Micheál Martin: No, I was uncomfortable about the exchanges regarding groceries. People need to take a long-term approach to this issue. As Senator Keaveney said, it has worked both ways. It has created issues on both sides of the Border, about that there is no question. I follow the instincts of Senator Quinn and others. We are coming from a perspective which is all-Ireland in terms of trade, which is why the work of InterTrade Ireland is so important. As Senator Bradford and others said, the fact that people do not travel to the North and South has been an historic reality since the Troubles began. Therefore, if we examine the issue in an all-island economic context, there are many benefits for people who create jobs in the South in terms of providing solutions and services to businesses and people in the North, and vice versa. We have to look at the big picture. There were many other contributions which we will take on board and we look forward to working with the House to advance this agenda.

An Cathaoirleach: Time is almost up.

Senator Donie Cassidy: As there was a vote in the Dáil we did not start until 5.40 p.m. To allow time for colleagues to make their contributions, with the agreement of the House I propose an amendment to the Order of Business to extend the debate until 8 p.m.

Senator Maurice Cummins: With all due respect, we have already extended the debate for ten minutes and agreed it would be postponed from 5 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. Other people have party commitments.

An Cathaoirleach: I have three matters on the Adjournment with Ministers waiting to take them.

Senator David Norris: I agree with Senator Cassidy. It is very awkward but it would be very unfortunate if the House did not hear from Senator Doherty, who is a Sinn Féin representative, 805 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator David Norris.] one of the most significant parties involved in this situation. It is wrong that Ministers are not prepared. I do not care——

Deputy Micheál Martin: There was a vote of confidence.

Senator David Norris: Even so, that could have been got around in some way. I am not blaming the Minister——

An Cathaoirleach: This is a waste of time. I want to take Senator Doherty.

Senator David Norris: The Order of Business here is chaotic.

Deputy Micheál Martin: As the Senator can imagine, a vote of confidence is a significant matter and my close colleague is the Minister, Deputy O’Dea.

An Cathaoirleach: I want to call Senator Doherty.

Senator Donie Cassidy: On the Order of Business, I allocated two and a half hours for the debate, from 5 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. but it did not start until 5.40 p.m.

An Cathaoirleach: That is not my fault.

Senator Donie Cassidy: I am not saying it is. Colleagues in the House wish to make a contribution. I am prepared to forgo the five minutes which are allocated for my concluding comments. If colleagues want to make a submission, I want them to be facilitated.

An Cathaoirleach: Senator Cassidy is giving his five minutes to Senator Mooney.

Senator Pearse Doherty: I thank Senator Cassidy for accommodating the extension of time. He gave a commitment to me earlier that he would ensure I had a chance to speak as during the last debate we were pressed for time. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire go dtí an Teach. Cuirim leis an méid atá ráite ag na Seanadóiri eile ó thaobh an buíochas agus an moladh atá tuillte ag an Aire féin, an Taoiseach agus an fhoireann a bhí acu i gCaisleán na Croimghlinne agus iad ansin ar feadh beagnach dhá seachtain ag déileáil le na cainteanna seo. Glacaim leis an moladh atá curtha chun tosaigh anseo ag Páirtí Fhianna Fáil. I commend the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michéal Martin, and the Taoiseach for their involvement in the recent talks at Hillsborough Castle. I accept the motion and the amendment tabled by Senator O’Toole and his colleagues which makes the motion much stronger. Perhaps in the future we should look again at its wording. As I listened to the Minister’s contribution and those of Senators I noted that each of them paid tribute to all involved. This is very important in the aftermath of an historic agreement reached between Sinn Féin and the DUP. It is the first time the DUP has signed up in full to an agreement. We are all aware it did not go into the talks on the Good Friday Agreement and objected to it. During the talks on the St Andrews Agreement it cherrypicked parts of it and signed up to them but it did not agree with others. This is the first time we have an agreement which has been signed up to and agreed by the DUP and Sinn Féin, of which the two Governments are guarantors, with the support of other political parties. It is important, therefore, that the motion commends all those involved who got us to this stage and are taking politics on the island of Ireland to a new and better level, one that recognises the diversity of political views and respects the different traditions and political positions. 806 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

I had the privilege of being involved in the talks as part of the team at Hillsborough where I met the Minister on occasion. I also had the opportunity to be involved in the team in the talks on the St. Andrews Agreement more than three years ago. During the talks I was very conscious of a negative attitude in many sections of the media and among some political com- mentators who expressed their frustration at the length of time it was taking to reach agreement and the fact that the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister were tied up in discussions for three days, as if the issues being discussed were minor parochial issues that should have been dealt within a matter of minutes. The reality is that the agreement reached at Hillsborough on 5 February is substantial. It ends British involvement in a great number of policing and justice issues on the island of Ireland, as well as in the issue of parading. It is an agreement between the DUP and Sinn Féin and the other parties on outstanding issues arising from the Good Friday Agreement. Some parties representing obstructionist Unionism had refused to honour other commitments entered into in previous agreements, in particular to have an Acht na Gaeilge. The Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, will have a particular interest in the fact that the parties have agreed, in section 5 of the agreement, to look at outstanding issues. Gerry Adams announced at the weekend that the Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure, Nelson McCausland, was to bring an Irish language strategy to the Executive before the end of the month. Also concerning the Irish language, our negotiating team secured an extra £20 million from the British Government to support Irish language initiatives within the Six Counties. In addition, much work was done on behalf of the two Governments to ensure the future availability of RTE and TG4 as we changed over to digital broadcasting. The issues were fundamental and very important. They have divided society for a long time. The issue of parading was very sensitive. Some thought they would be able to use it as a precondition in the talks. It was not and what was demanded by rejectionist Unionism was not achieved. I listened to those Members who said the solution lay in the use of the words “our roads” but that was not the solution. It is a matter of respect. The solution is that if a group wants to march down a street in a predominantly Nationalist community, it needs to have the consent of the residents of that community. In over 90% of the marches organised by the Loyal Orders, this is not an issue because there has been local agreement and respect. However, in a number of areas, including the Garvaghy Road and Ormeau Road, that has not been achievable until now. Marches have not gone down the Garvaghy Road for over a decade and will not do so until the issue of respect is dealt with. That is the new agreed formula, on which a working group set up during the past week and a half will report in the next ten days. It is looking for a framework to gain cross-party support and investigating how we can resolve the outstanding contentious issues. There are parades which are contentious and allow tensions to boil over during the summer, when the rights of paraders are placed above those of residents. The framework is to ensure rights will be balanced. It is not about taking away rights from anybody but about ensuring all sections of society will have rights. I want to mention, as many others have, dissident groups and the threat they pose to the peace process. We in Sinn Féin are very conscious of this threat and, as a party, have taken risks for many years. We have shown true leadership in trying to find agreement and push forward on terms which we believe are achievable through the infrastructure of the St. Andrews and Good Friday Agreements and now the Hillsborough agreement towards the eventual outcome — Irish unity. Because of the leadership we have provided we have been subject to death threats. Again this week a number of my party colleagues have been subject to such threats. Some have suffered attempts to burn down their houses, while in the past some of my colleagues lost their lives when such threats were carried out. Gerry Kelly put it clearly and succinctly last night when he spoke about dissident groups. When people have no strategy, 807 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion

[Senator Pearse Doherty.] aims or objectives and when what they are doing does not move them one single step closer to their ultimate objective, all they are are gunmen. They should stand down because they are doing a disservice to the Republican cause and people who have identified themselves as Republicans for generations. Although we may talk about the Hillsborough agreement and the opportunities provided within it, parties in the South should not be afraid of the issue of Irish unity. I sat in the throne room when Martin McGuinness and Peter Robinson announced the agreement to the world. Standing beside Peter Robinson, Martin McGuinness described himself as an Irish republican committed to Irish unity. Like Ian Paisley, Peter Robinson knows exactly who he is negotiating with and the terms of the deal his party has reached. They know our objective is to achieve Irish unity. That is what we will continue to try to achieve. However, that does not scare them because we can find common ground on which we can work together to better the lives of the people we represent. I challenge parties in the South to work towards Irish unity. The first step might be a Green Paper on the issue. When it was debated in the Dáil a number of years ago, the argument made was that we could not rock the boat, that we needed to be sensitive and careful not to upset Unionists. Unionists understand Fianna Fáil, as it states in every election programme or on every poster, is a republican party committed to the achievement of Irish unity, as are Fine Gael, Sinn Féin and the Labour Party. What we need to do is change this type of republicanism with a strap-line on a poster to active republicanism. There are a number of steps we can take in order to do this. We could consider publishing a Green Paper for discussion and in prep- aration for Irish unity. We could extend Oireachtas representation by extending the voting system for Seanad elections or the Presidential election to people living in the North. Many have worked and continue to work to expand on the work the Government is doing through the North-South Ministerial Council and on interventions to offer financial support to areas within the Six Counties. I thank the Cathaoirleach for his indulgence.

Senator Paschal Mooney: I endorse everything that has been said about the extraordinary contribution made by all participants in reaching this agreement. I remember a particular soundbite that emerged in the news coverage, namely, that the Taoiseach, when he had travelled to the North and had to stay over, had not even carried a toothbrush. Whether that is true, it epitomises the total commitment of the Irish and British Governments. I applaud the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michéal Martin, who stayed with the process throughout in co-operation with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Shaun Woodward. The tributes paid to the Taoiseach, the British Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown, the DUP, Sinn Féin and the other political parties in the North, the UUP, SDLP and the Alliance Party, are well merited. As did Senator Doherty in his fine contribution, I compliment the Leader on ensuring Sinn Féin’s voice was heard in this debate. However, I want to put it on record that a core principle of Fianna Fáil, from its beginning in 1926, was, is and remains the reunification of this country. Speaking as a Fianna Fáil Senator — I know I speak for all of my colleagues — I say to Senator Doherty that we are not at all afraid of unity. I assumed that what was happening in Hillsbor- ough was part of the building blocks towards unity, on a peaceful basis and with the co-operation and consent of both sides. It is evident from all that has been happening since the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 that we are moving to some form of a new — to paraphrase his party leader — dispensation on this island. That is to be welcomed and is quite extraordinary 808 Power Sharing Agreement in 17 February 2010. Northern Ireland: Motion when one thinks of all that has been achieved since 1998. Some 72% of the voters of Northern Ireland voted in favour of the Agreement. The Good Friday Agreement also produced various bodies that are now in operation, such as the North-South Ministerial Council, the British-Irish Council and the North-South implementation bodies. One of these in particular, with which the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, who is here, will be familiar because it comes under his brief, Waterways Ireland is based in Enniskillen. It does significant positive work, not only in the context of maintaining our waterways, but of selling the island of Ireland abroad and the wonderful beauty and majesty of our lakes and waterways. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív was the first Minister to commit himself publicly to the development and reopening of the Ulster Canal, which will link the entire island of Ireland through its waterways. I have no doubt that work will continue into the future and will be a wonderful achievement for the whole island. I am very pleased that Senator Doherty devoted much of his contribution to the fringe violence going on. It is not the challenges that have been agreed on at Hillsborough that the Northern Ireland Executive or the Irish and British Governments must face, but the incipient, consistent continuous sniping by a small but very effective minority of people who believe the only way forward is by the barrel of a gun. Senator Doherty referred to Gerry Kelly. It is significant that Gerry Kelly comes from a background that supported militant republicanism, but is now firmly embedded in the parliamentary and democratic system in Northern Ireland, such as it may be. He has stated there is “no support for, or appetite for, armed actions within the republican community”. That is a significant contribution. What Senator Doherty said about the challenges that will face the Northern Ireland Execu- tive, and by extension the Government here, if the violence continues is important. Let me give an example. We have all welcomed the INLA laying down its arms and its decommissioning process now confirmed by General de Chastelain. It might be worthwhile to recall for the record of the House what the INLA did in its 35 years of militancy. One of the most significant actions it took was that it blew Airey Neave to smithereens, just after he had been appointed Northern Ireland spokesperson in the first Margaret Thatcher Administration. I do not wish to dilute the 3,500 awful, tragic deaths as a result of violence in the North, but I firmly believe that in narrow political terms that particular action by the INLA poisoned Margaret Thatcher towards anything Irish, from 1979 onwards. I believe it strongly influenced and preju- diced her and her first Administration against realistic movement towards trying to solve the issues not only North-South, but east-west. That is just one of the legacies of the INLA. We cannot forget either that the most significant massacre that took place in Northern Ireland was that at the Dropping Well pub, where 17 innocent people were blown to bits in 1982 by the INLA. The INLA was the most vicious group of militant republicanism that operated on this island. Thank God it has now seen the light and laid down its arms. It is important that, as Senator Doherty has said, it continues to be said in this House and in the Northern Ireland Executive that there is no room whatsoever for these people who — I will not say what they call themselves — are nothing but thugs and murderers. What happened to Peadar Heffron is an example of the sort of depths to which such groups will sink. These are the challenges facing the Northern Ireland Assembly, but I would like to finish on a positive note. I endorse everything that has been said about Mark Durkan and wish him well in the continuing contribution he will make to Northern Ireland politics. I also welcome Margaret Ritchie, the first female leader of a major party in Northern Ireland. I pay tribute to the pioneers, Monica McWilliams, Pearl Sagar and Jane Morris who in 1996 formed the Women’s Coalition and who had to struggle through the prejudice and male bastion of politics in Northern Ireland at that time. How far we have come. I pay tribute too to Mo Mowlam. In 809 Scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí 17 February 2010. Gaeilge

[Senator Paschal Mooney.] the very week that the Northern Ireland agreement was being hammered out in Hillsborough, Channel 4 transmitted the most extraordinary film, “Mo”. I urge RTE to purchase this film and broadcast it on national television. Perhaps the Minister present, Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív, might play some role in that. That film brings home the tremendous commitment, energy and determination this unique woman had and the contribution she made to what we are discussing today. Lord rest her soul.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion, as amended, agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach: When is it proposed to sit again?

Senator Donie Cassidy: Ag 10.30 maidin amárach.

Adjournment Matters.

————

Scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge. Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill: Gabhaim buíochas as an deis an rún seo a ardú maidir leis na coláistí Gaeilge agus an liúntas atá ar fáil ón Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta do mná tí na coláistí Gaeilge, nó do na teaghlaigh a choinníonn scoláirí faoi scéim na bhfoghlai- meoirí Gaeilge. Tá sean eolas agam ar an tionscal seo, mar nuair a bhí mé féin ag fásaníos agus méóg, choinnigh mo mháthair na scoláirí Gaeilge gach bliain sa bhaile. Chomh maith le sin, tar éis dom an ardteist a dhéanamh, d’oibrigh mé roinnt blianta i gcoláistí Gaeilge i nGaoth Dobhair mar chinnire, fad agus a bhí mé ar choláiste. Bhain mé spraoi agus sult as na laethanta agus na blianta sin. Tuigim an dá thaobh anseo, taobh na mná tí agus taobh na coláistí de bhrí sin. Tuigim go maith go bhfuil buntáiste substaintiúil ag baint le tionscal na coláistí Gaeilge. Is ceart tionscal a thabhairt air mar go bhfuil thart ar 25,000 scoláire ag freastal ar na coláistí Gaeilge. Cru- thaíonn sin ioncam a bhaineann le tionscal Gaeltachta mar go mbíonn daoine ag teacht go dtí an Ghaeltacht — na scoláirí iad féin, na tuismitheoirí ag teacht thart ag an deireadh seachtaine agus teaghlaigh a freastalaíonn ar na ceantair fosta. Caitheann siad airgead sna bialanna, na tithe ósta agus sa cheantar go ginearálta. Tá buntáiste ag baint leis na coláistí don cheantar, don phobal áitiúil, do theaghlaigh agus do na mná tí.Indáiríre, jab atá i gceist do na mná tí nuair a thagann na scoláirí thart gach bliain. Ba mhaith liom buíochas a thabhairt don Aire, an Teachta Éamon Ó Cuív, as an dea-obair atá déanta aige ó ceapadh é mar Aire Stáit i 1997. Bhí sé ag plé leis an tionscal seo ó shin. Tá dul chun cinn suntasach déanta. Fiú nuair a bhí na mná tí ag iarraidh go mbeadh an ioncam a bhí siad ag saothrú glan ó cáin, rinne an tAire moladh ag an am agus fuair sé an 8o’clock cúiteamh cána ón Roinn Airgeadais. Bhí sin fógraithe sa cháinfhaisnéis roinnt blianta ó shin agus rinne sin difear ollmhórdonamná tí. Tuigim go bhfuil brú ar an Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta, brú níos mó ná riamh roimhe seo, de bhrí go bhfuil riaradh na scéime go huile agus go hiomlán anois faoi chúram na Roinne sin. Bhí deontas riaracháin ar fáil ón Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta, ach cuireadh deireadh leis an deontas sin anuraidh. Cuireann sin brú breise ar an Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta agus ba mhaith liom aitheantas a thabairt do sin. Tá athbhreithniú déanta ar scéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge i measc an phobal go ginear- álta. Bhí go leor plé ar seo le seacht nó a hocht mí anuas ag coistí pobail ó foilsíodh tuarascáil 810 Scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí 17 February 2010. Gaeilge

Mac Cárthaigh i mí Lúnasa seo caite. Bhí moladh sa tuarascáil sin deireadh a chur le scéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge, le na coláistí Gaeilge agus leis an ioncam a bhí na mná tí ag saothrú as an foinse sin. Tá lúcháir ormsa nach Mac Cárthaigh a bhí ag déanamh an cinneadh agus go raibh deis ag an Rialtas an ionchur polaitíochta a bhí ag Fianna Fáil agus ag an Aire, an Teachta Ó Cuív, a chur i bhfeidhm. De bhrí an ionchur sin, níl deireadh á chur leis an scéim seo. Tá straitéis 20 bliain don Ghaeilge foilsithe a leagfaidh amach an teanga ar fud an Stáit sa 20 bliain amach romhainn. Tá aitheantas suntasach tugtha do ról na coláistí Gaeilge insan straitéis sin agus tá fhios againn go raibh ionchur mór ag an Aire ann. Fearaim buíochas dó as an méid atá insan straitéis a chinnteoidh ról na gcoláistí Gaeilge insan todhchaí. Tuigim i mbliana go bhfuil brú ollmhór ar cistí Stát agus go gcaithfear ciorraithe de €4 billiúin a aimsiú tar éis an cháinaisnéise agus go raibh deacrachtaí ag na hAirí go léir ag tarraingt suas go dtí an cháinaisnéise. Tá sé cosúil le reáchtáil tí. Muna bhfuil an airgead ag teacht isteach go dtí an teach, ní féidir an airgead a scaipeadh thart. Dá bhrí sin beidh cinntí deacra le déanamh faoin scéim seo agus scéimeanna eile. Tá mé ag ardú na ceiste seo chun an éiginnteacht atá ann agus a bhí cothaithe óáiteanna éagsúla a árdú agus soiléiriú a thabhairt go mbeidh an scéim ar fáil i mbliana agus fosta oiread airgead agus is féidir. Tá ardú suntasach tagtha ar an airgead a bhí ar fáil faoin scéim seo ón Roinn do na mná tí suas go dtí €10.50 i 2009, ardú substaintiúil. Táimid buíoch as an ardú sin agus tá súil agam nach mbeidh ionchur móragna ciorraithe ar sin i mbliana. Ba mhaith liom, agus muid ag caint ar an ábhar seo, tagairt a dhéanamh fosta do scéim eile atá ag an Roinn, sé, sin scéim na gcampaí samhraidh. Scéim iontach tábhachtach é do ceantair Ghaeltachta, páistí Gaeltachta, na pobail agus don teanga.

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív): Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir Brian Ó Domhnaill as ucht na ceiste seo a thógáil tráthnóna. Mar ata a fhios aige, cuireadh túslescéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge mar ata sí faoi láthair breis is 30 bliain ó shin. Bunaíodh an chéad choláiste Gaeilge 100 bliain ó shin agus bhí baint ag seanathair liom leis sin. Faoin scéim is féidir le mo Roinn deontas laethúil a íoc le teaghlaigh aitheanta sa Ghaeltacht a choinníonn ar iostas foghlaimeoirí Gaeilge a bhíonn ag freastal ar choláistí Gaeilge samhraidh. Cúrsaí Gaeilge trí seachtaine a bhíonn i gceist go hiondúil agus is imí an Mheitheamh, Iúil agus Lúnasa a eagraíonn na coláistí na cúrsaí. Íocann an Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta deontas laethúil faoin scéim seo, chomh maith i leith foghlaimeoirí Gaeilge a bhíonn ag freastal ar roinnt bheag coláistí cónaithe ach ní bhíonn aon teaghlach ná bean tí i gceist sna cúrsaí sin. D’fhreastal 25,162 scoláire ar chúrsaí Gaeilge — sa Ghaeltacht den chuid is mó dóibh — faoi scéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge sa bhliain 2009. Is léir go bhfuil leibhéal spéise forleathan i bhfoghlaim na Gaeilge i measc daoine óga. Sa bhreis ar sin, d’fhreastal 1,223 duine ar chúrsaí do dhaoine fásta agus 1,045 ar choláistí lasmuigh den Ghaeltacht. Le blianta anuas is léir go raibh freastal láidir ar na coláistí agus tá súil agam go leanfaidh an treocht seo sa bhliain 2010. Ta ráite agam go minic go bhfuil scéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge ar cheann de na scéime- anna is tábhachtaí a fheidhmíonn mo Roinn ó thaobh láidriú agus cur chun cinn na Gaeilge de sa Ghaeltacht agus taobh amuigh di. Is léir go bhfuil beocht ar leith le hearnáil na gcoláistí Gaeilge le blianta beaga anuas. Bheinn an-dóchasach go mbeidh ar chumas na gcoláistí, i gcom- har le mo Roinn, deimhin a dhéanamh de go leanfaidh an scéal amhlaidh sna blianta amach romhainn. Le caighdeánnagcúrsaí a chinntiú, ba mhaith liom a mheabhrú nach dtugtar aitheantas faoin scéim ach do na teaghlaigh sin a bhfuil mo Roinn sásta go bhfuil caighdeán ard Gaeilge ag gach ball don teaghlach. Ní leor, mar shampla, an Ghaeilge a bheith in úsáid sa teaghlach le linn cúrsaí amháin. Caithfidh an Ghaeilge a bheith mar theanga an teaghlaigh i gcaitheamh na 811 Scéim na bhFoghlaimeoirí 17 February 2010. Gaeilge

[Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív.] bliana. Dá bhrí sin tá an scéim seo fíor thábhachtach freisin ó thaobh buanú na Gaeilge de sa Ghaeltacht. Ta ionchur an-mhóraganscéim freisin ó thaobh eacnamaíocht na Gaeltachta. Is tionscail ann féin iad na coláistí atá ag baint úsáide as an acmhainn is tábhachtaí ata sa Ghael- tacht. Tuigim go bhfuil suim léirithe ag roinnt mhaith teaghlaigh nua sa Ghaeltacht scoláirí a choinneáil faoin scéim, agus déanfar iarracht tairbhe na scéime a leathnú amach do na teaghlaigh sin freisin. Is í an Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta a thug aitheantas do na coláistí Gaeilge suas go dtí an bhliain 2009. Le tamall anuas, bhí cainteanna ar siúl idir an dá Roinn maidir le todhchaí na gcoláistí Gaeilge i 2010 agus ina dhiaidh. Tááthas orm a rá go bhfuil toradh an-sásúil tagtha as na cainteanna sin anois. Faoin socrú nua, beidh cúraimí riaracháin na gcoláistí Gaeilge faoi chúram mo Roinn ó Feabhra 2010 ar aghaidh agus beidh mo Roinn freagrach as polasaithe a chur i bhfeidhm a chinnteoidh forbairt leanúnach ar na coláistí agus ard chaighdeáin sa chóras ina iomláine. Is í mo Roinn a bheidh freagrach freisin as aitheantas a thabhairt do na coláistí Gaeilge agus an riaracháin a bhainfidh leo. Cuideoidh cigireacht na Roinne Oideachais agus Eolaíochta leis an Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta le fiúntas an tsoláthair sna coláistí Gaeilge a chinntiú tri chlár cigireachta a reáchtáil i sampla de na coláistí Gaeilge ar bhonn bliantúil. Soláthróidh an chigireacht dearbhú cáilíochta maidir leis an soláthar i gcoláistí Gaeilge agus cuirfidh siad comhairle ar mo Roinn nuair is gá.Tasé curtha rompu ag an gcigireacht meas ar a chéile agus muinínasa chéile a chothú idir an chigireacht agus pobal na gcoláistí Gaeilge, ar mhaithe le cumarsáid dheimhneach, phroifisiúnta a fhorbairt. Chuige sin, déanfaidh an chigireacht ard chaighdeán tuairisceoireachta a dheimhniú agus i ndiaidh tréimhse na cigireachta sna coláistí Gaeilge 2010, d’fheadfaí leagan deireanach na tuairisce a fhoilsiú ar shuíomh gréasáin na Roinne Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta. Bhí cruinniú agam le CONCOS – scáth-eagraíocht na gcoláistí Gaeilge — ar an 15 Feabhra 2010, agus beidh mo Roinn ag scríobh go dtí na coláistí go léir go luath chun na socruithe nua uile a chur in iúldóibh. Is céim suntasach é go mbeidh riaradh iomláncóras na gcoláistí Gaeilge, idir coláistí agus teaghlaigh nó na mná tí mar a thugtar orthu go minic, faoi chúram Roinn amháin feasta. Ta áthas orm a chinntiú don Teach agus don Seanadóir go leanfaidh scéim na bhfoghlai- meoirí Gaeilge ar aghaidh i mbliana agus, go deimhin féin, ar aghaidh níos faide. Mar is eol don Teach, tháinig ardú suntasach ar an ráta laethúil a bhí iníoctha faoin scéim suas go dtí 2009 agus, ag cur an soláthar airgeadais atá ar fáil do mo Roinn i mbliana san áireamh, tá cinneadh déanta anois go mbeidh €10 in aghaidh an lae iníoctha leis na teaghlaigh a choinníonn scoláirí faoin scéim sa bhliain 2010, sé sin, laghdú de thart ar 5% nó 50c in aghaidh na hoíche. Ag an am céanna, is féidir liom a chinntiú go leanfar ar aghaidh leis na díolúintí cánacha ata i bhfeidhm do na mná tí.Tá sé sin thar a bheith tábhachtach do na mná tí agus sábhálann sé go leor obair cuntasaíochta. Leis na socruithe nua ata pléite le CONCOS agus a chuirfear i bhfeidhm i mbliana, is deimhin liomsa go gcuirfear go mórlehéifeacht, luach ar airgead agus caighdeánnascéime sa bhliain 2010 agus sna blianta atá amach romhainn. Beidh róllárnach ag na coláistí i gcomhthéacs an straitéis 20-bliain don Ghaeilge agus tá se tábhachtach ó thaobh cur le héifeacht na gcoláistí go mbeidh an comhordú agus na cúramaí go léir a bhaineann leo faoi chúram Roinn amháin sna blianta amach romhainn. Ó d’ardaigh an Seanadóir an cheist liom maidir leis na campaí samhraidh, is féidir liom a dheimhniú go leanfaidh na campaí samhraidh Gaeltachta ar aghaidh. Creidim féin go bhfuil siad thar a bheith tábhachtach d’aos óg na Gaeltachta agus is féidir leis an Seanadóir a bheith cinnte de nach ndéanfaí aon fhaillí sna sampaí samhraidh sa bhliain 2010. 812 Archaeological 17 February 2010. Sites

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill: Tá mé iontach buíoch as an Aire. Sin fógra a chuirfidh lúcháir ar na mná tí. Beidh siad in ann pleanáil anois don todhchaí.

Senator Pearse Doherty: Caillfidh siad níos mó ná €300.

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill: Nuair atá bean tí ag socrú scoláirí a choimeád don bhliain, caithfidh fios a bheith aici cé mhéid a gheobhaidh sí.Tá fhios aici anois. Nuair a fhéachann tú ar ghearradh siar gach aon áit eile nílsé chomh holc agus a bhí daoine eile ag meas nó ag súil go mbeadh sé. Rud eile, má fhéachfaimid ar thuarascáil Mhic Carthaigh agus na moltaí abhí ag an tuarascáil sin i dtaca leis an Ghaeltacht agus le Roinn Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta an mbeadh sé ceart a rá go bhfuil deireadh le tuarascáil Mhic Carthaigh anois?

An Cathaoirleach: Go raibh maith agat.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: Is féidir glacadh leis i dtaobh na Roinne go bhfuil na ciorraithe atá le déanamh déanta. Ní raibh sé easca iad a dhéanamh mar a thuigeann an Seanadóir agus mar a chuir sé iláthair an Tí tá laghdú mór ar an ioncam atá an Stát ciste ag saothrú faoi láthair ach mar atá soiléir anois ó na meastacháin a foilsíodh tá tosaíocht á thabhairt don Ghaeilge agus is féidir bheith cinnte go leanfaidh na scéimeanna Gaeltachta éagsúla ar aghaidh agus go mórmhór go leanfaidh na scéimeanna sin atá tairbhiúil don Ghaeilge agus mar a luafaidh mé leanfaidh scéim na bhfoghlaimeoirí Gaeilge ar aghaidh an fhad is a mbeidh i gcumhacht. Is féidir freisin bheith cinnte go leanfaidh scéimeanna ar nósscéim na gcúntóirí teanga agus scéim na gcampaí samhraidh. Mar is eol don Seanadóir, tá forbairt speisialta á dhéanamh maidir leis na heagrachtaí pobail Ghaeltachta agus ag treisiú a bheimid faoin bPlean 20 Bliain don Ghaeilge.

Archaeological Sites. Senator Ciaran Cannon: In mid-2007, a developer began construction of a roundabout at a place called Loro Gate on the periphery of Athenry town. He was obliged under the planning permission granted to him to construct a roundabout at that location and in this regard had liaised extensively with senior road engineers in Galway County Council to ensure the best roundabout design from the point of view of road safety. The site is very tight and, following lengthy discussion, an optimum design was arrived at. In carrying out that construction he retained, although he was not obliged to do so, the services of an archaeologist because he suspected being in close proximity to the medieval walls of Athenry he might come across some archaeological remains, which he did. He exposed part of the old Athenry wall con- structed some time in the 14th century. He immediately ceased construction and sought the advice of an archaeologist, Mr. Hugh Carey, who works in the monuments section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Mr. Carey liaised with the developer and Galway County Council in regard to how these remains could be preserved for the future. The conclusion reached was that the only way the remains could be preserved was to entomb them in a concrete sarcophagus and build the roundabout over them. It was not possible to leave the remains on view to the public as that would require a minimising of the roundabout or movement of it to another location, for which the site did not allow. Road safety concerns certainly did not allow for the building of a smaller roundabout at the location. This location is one of the busiest junctions in Athenry town. I am sure the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, knows it well. It is in close proximity to Kenny Park, one of the busiest sporting venues in the country, and is close to the biggest retail development in Athenry. It funnels traffic off the new M6 motorway into Athenry town and will soon funnel traffic into a new IDA development on the periphery of the town. 813 Archaeological 17 February 2010. Sites

[Senator Ciaran Cannon.]

On the advice of a senior archaeologist in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the developer applied, as required, for a licence. He applied for the licence on 24 September 2007, almost three years ago. The developer and management and staff of Galway County Council have been trying without success for almost three years to secure the licence. Every time we believed we were on the cusp of a licence being issued, the Minister’s Department and, I would argue, the Minister seemed to take issue with granting the licence. The Minister first sought further advice from the senior road engineer in regard to whether the roundabout could be minimised or moved to a different location and was assured it could not. Following that advice, he sought the advice of the National Roads Authority which again confirmed that the only solution was that originally proposed. When the Minister was not happy with that advice he sought the advice of the Department of Transport. I understand it has offered the same advice to the Minister. I will outline the timeline associated with this issue. The application was made on 24 September 2007, supported by Mr. Hugh Carey, the archaeologist working with the Minister’s Department. On 9 November 2007 I received a response from the Department stating that the application for ministerial consent for works to the national monument was being processed as expeditiously as possible. In June 2008, I received a long letter from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, which concluded: “I must now proceed with making the decision on the application for ministerial consent, in this case on the basis of the information before my Department.” On 22 April 2009, I received an e- mail stating that the Minister has asked the officials to conclude their further examination of the various issues as quickly as possible and would keep in touch with regard to developments. It is high time that a decision was made, be it to grant or refuse the licence, which is the Minister’s prerogative. We urgently need a decision on this matter. It is deeply unfair to the people of Athenry who are forced to drive around a roundabout painted in the centre of the road and marked out by old barrels and to the developer and staff and management of Galway County Council who have done the best they could to try to expedite this matter. I hope that the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, can provide a positive response on this matter.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley. I thank Senator Cannon for raising this issue. A section of the medieval town wall, forming a part of the Loro Gate to the town of Athenry, was discovered during archaeological monitoring of development works in the immediate area. The lower courses and foundation of the wall are located under the roadway at a junction adjacent to the entrance of a new housing development. The planning permission for the housing development requires the developer to construct a new roundabout at the junction. The town defences of Athenry are a national monument within the meaning of the National Monuments Acts 1930-2004 and part of the town wall is already protected by a preservation order. The newly discovered section of the wall is under the public road, is in the ownership of Galway County Council, and the consent of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is required under section 14 of the National Monuments Act 1930 for any works affecting it. Although public safety and traffic management are important considerations, the Loro Gate is an important part of the local historical record in Athenry. Every possible effort must always be made to preserve and protect our archaeological heritage. In this case, that means fully exploring and, if feasible, adapting the configuration of the roundabout to reduce its impact as far as possible so as to allow the monument to be preserved to best effect for future generations. 814 Special 17 February 2010. Educational Needs

Following discovery of the remains of the wall, development work ceased and an application for ministerial consent was submitted on behalf of the developer for the preservation in situ of the wall under the proposed roundabout. Submissions were received from other local interests who favoured the roundabout being redesigned to facilitate the wall section being preserved in such a way that it could be put on public display. As part of its examination of the consent application and the suggested alternative approaches, Galway County Council was informed that any recommendation to the Minister to grant consent for the roundabout as proposed would have to be supported by clear evidence that all relevant factors had been taken into consideration in reaching a balanced and reasonable conclusion. A report subsequently produced by the council with the assistance of the National Roads Authority has examined a number of possible options for dealing with traffic at the junction. The Department of Trans- port has also provided observations on the traffic issue, as has the National Museum of Ireland in regard to the developer’s proposal to preserve the monument in situ under the roundabout. The various reports and observations are being carefully examined in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, taking due account of the archaeological, historical and local significance of the Loro Gate. I have listened carefully to what the Senator has said and I assure him that it is Minister’s intention to have the matter finalised as speedily as possible. All relevant factors are being considered with a view to the best solution being achieved.

Senator Ciaran Cannon: I thank the Minister for his reply which somehow implies it was the developer’s idea to preserve the remains in situ, namely, entomb them in concrete and build the road over them. It was not. It was the idea of the archaeologist working in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, supported by senior roads engineers in Galway County Council. The idea was proposed by the Minister’s expert in the field of archae- ology. I sincerely hope that when the Minister uses the words “as speedily as possible”, they will somehow have a different meaning to the words “as quickly as possible”, which he used on 22 April 2009.

Special Educational Needs. Senator Pearse Doherty: It would be remiss of me not to mention the earlier debate. Con- trary to what Senator Ó Domhnaill said, this will not be a welcome announcement for the 230 mná tí that I know in Donegal. We are talking about the loss of over €300 for the average bean an tí in that county.

An Cathaoirleach: That matter has been dealt with. We are on Senator Doherty’s Adjourn- ment matter now.

Senator Pearse Doherty: That is on top of the dole cuts that many of them are forced to live with, which is an increased burden. We know that there are other burdens also, including safety certificates.

An Cathaoirleach: We can only deal with the matter that Senator Doherty has raised.

Senator Pearse Doherty: I will have a chance to discuss it later on because the Minister did not want to answer our party last week in the Dáil concerning that matter. He had his set piece moment with Senator Ó Domhnaill.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator cannot speak on a matter that has already been dealt with.

815 Special 17 February 2010. Educational Needs

Senator Pearse Doherty: The Adjournment matter I am raising concerns special needs assistants. It is correlated because whether we are discussing special needs assistants or mná tí, the Government’s priorities are the bankers and millionaires. The Government will toss them a billion euro here and there, but they will take €5 off the mná tí and will remove classroom assistants from children with special needs. That is the issue I wish to discuss. It is proposed to cut 1,200 special needs assistants who will be made redundant by the end of March. Those are the estimated figures. I am asking the Minister not to proceed with these cuts because the SNAs are needed. They are required because they provide supports to children with special needs who wish to fulfil their educational potential. The children concerned have been assessed and it has been decided that they need additional supports. We are talking about children with various conditions, including autism spectrum, ADHD and dyslexia. In some cases, SNAs were withdrawn from children with Down’s syndrome. It is a scandalous situation which has a direct impact not only on jobs, which will cause massive hardship, but also on extremely young and vulnerable children. Cuts to special needs supports are not only horribly cruel but will also seriously impair these children’s education for years to come. This is all being done in the name of saving money. At the moment we do not have clear figures as to how many SNA posts have been lost and how many more are about to go. Some 403 special needs assistants are employed in County Donegal alone. Like every other SNA across the State, they deserve to know whether their jobs are secure. Neither do we know if further cuts to SNAs will occur in the middle of the school year, or if children will even have a special needs assistant until the end of the year. The Minister should get his head around the fact that making blind cuts to education will not save money. It may save a few cent today, but it will cost euro in future. We are talking about children, not statistics or numbers that are churned out of a computer. They have a right to be educated in an appropriate environment with the appropriate support to suit their needs. I am seeking clarity on how many SNAs have been sacked by the Government in recent months and how many are about to be sacked. Will the Government listen to my pleas on behalf of SNAs across the State, as well as children with special needs, their parents and teachers? The Government should get its priorities right and support these children. When proclaiming the Irish Republic, the leaders of this country talked about cherishing all the children of the nation equally. Let us get our priorities right and invest in our children’s future. We should not try to save a buck here and there, while at the same time paying the money saved into the banks and for bankers’ wages. The Government’s priorities are ridiculous. The Minister and Senator Ó Domhnaill have infuriated me by saying that mná tí will welcome getting €300 less this year than last year, after all the cuts they have had to go through. I am annoyed and am sorry for expressing my anger, but this is a very important issue. I am a father with young children. Thank God none of them has been diagnosed with special needs, but none of us knows what the future holds. No matter what learning difficulties children are born with, they should have the same rights and opportunities of access to education as anybody else. That is what goes to the core of this motion.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: Tá an-iontas orm faoin méid a bhí le rá ag an Seanadóir, mar ar ndóigh le blianta fada bhí an íocaíocht a bhí na coláistí ag tabhairt i dTír Conaill i bhfad taobh thar den íocaíocht a bhíádhéanamh i gConamara nó sa deisceart. Go deimhin féin, murach mise agus céim a thóg mise a chur faoi ndeara do na coláistí €1.20 a íoc in aghaidh gach euro ón Roinn bheadh mná tí Thír Conaill i bhfad taobh thiar fósdonamná tí eile ar fud na tíre agus níor cheap mise riamh go raibh sé sin ceart. Ar ndóigh, tuigeann mná tí Thír Conaill murach gur chuir mise iachail ar na coláistííocaíocht cheart a dhéanamh leis na mná tí ní bheadh an íocaíocht atá acuiláthair na huaire acu. 816 Special 17 February 2010. Educational Needs

Maidir leis na SNA’stá sé thar a bheith tábhachtach go dtuigfidh an Seanadóir go bhfuil tábhachtach oideachais na ngasúir thar a bheith tábhachtach don Rialtas seo. Tá acmhainní nach beag curtha againn isteach sna scoileanna ar fud na tíre agus go mórmhór isteach ag tabhairt tacaíochta do gasúr le riachtanais speisialta. Chaitheadh €1 billiúin taobh istigh den chóras oideachais anuraidh don chúis seo amháin. Leanfaidh scoláirí ar aghaidh ag fáil tacaí- ochta faoin scéim seo mar a bhí le deich mbliana anuas. From the outset, I want to emphasise what is really important here. Schools which have enrolled children who qualify for support from a special needs assistant, SNA, will continue to be allocated SNA support. This is happening at the moment. The National Council for Special Education, NCSE, is processing applications from schools for SNA support. The SNA scheme has been a major factor in both ensuring the successful integration of children with special educational needs into mainstream education, and providing support to pupils enrolled in special schools and special classes. The SNA scheme will continue to be supported. The terms and criteria for the SNA scheme have not changed. Déarfaidh méésin i nGaeilge. Níor athraíodh ar chur ar bith na téarmaí a bhaineann leis an scéim seo. Where the criteria are met, SNA posts are being allocated. I can assure the House that there is no question of posts being removed from schools where they meet the scheme’s criteria. I am sure the Senator would agree that a scheme should be implemented according to its criteria — no more, no less. However, there is also no question of posts being left in schools indefinitely where they are deemed to be surplus to the care needs of the pupils or where the pupils themselves have left. I do not know whether the Senator is trying to justify a system whereby the school retains an SNA even though the pupil for whom the SNA was provided has left the system. As regards the SNA allocation process, it is important to understand that the allocation for any school, and any adjustments to that allocation, depend on a number of factors such as the number of pupils with care-medical needs leaving, the number of new pupils, and the changing care needs of existing pupils in the school. SNA allocations are therefore not permanent. They are increased or decreased as pupils who qualify for SNA support enrol in or leave a school. They are also decreased where a child’s care needs may have diminished over time. The Senator will be aware that the NCSE, through its network of local special educational needs organisers, SENOs, is responsible for allocating resource teachers and SNAs to schools to support children with special educational needs. The NCSE operates within the Minister’s criteria in allocating such support. The NCSE is independent in making and issuing its decisions on the allocation of such supports. The Department of Education and Science requested the NCSE to review all SNA posts because the Department had become aware that a number of SNA posts were in schools where the care needs of the pupils in the schools concerned did not justify such an allocation. Accordingly, the Department asked the NCSE to carry out a nationwide review of all schools to ensure SNA posts were allocated to schools in line with the care needs of pupils and that any excess posts would be withdrawn. The NCSE, through its network of SENOs, is carrying out a review of SNA allocations in all schools with a view to ensuring the criteria governing the allocation of such posts are properly met. SENOs are communicating the outcome of the review directly to schools as the review progresses. It is expected the NCSE will have completed the review by the end of March. The Senator is fully aware that the Department has prioritised the provision of special education supports for schools. This is a key Government policy. However, this does not mean that resources, allocated in response to various historical factors, are retained in schools ad infinitum. At a time of constrained resources, it is essential we ensure public resources are 817 The 17 February 2010. Adjournment

[Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív.] deployed as effectively as possible. If resources are left in an area which are not in accordance with the criteria, it means public resources are not available in another deserving area. I am sure the Senator shares the Minister’s concern that there be consistent application of policy in the allocation of special education supports across the country. That is all that is happening. The Minister can assure the Senator supports will continue to be made available to schools which have pupils who qualify for such supports. I hope this clarifies the matter for the Senator.

Senator Pearse Doherty: I am not arguing for SNAs to be kept in schools where the criteria are no longer being met. The Minister cannot brush it off as if the children concerned have left a school. If children leave, more will come in. More children are entering the education system than leaving it.

An Cathaoirleach: A question, please.

Senator Pearse Doherty: Therefore, the numbers should be increasing rather than decreasing, yet the Government is sacking 12% of SNAs. The only other explanation is that a child’s care needs will diminish over time. I have pointed out that the children in question are within the autism spectrum, children with Down’s syndrome and with ADHD. I do not know how close the Minister is to the people working on the ground, but as a good Minister and Deputy, I am he is in tune with his own constituents. This is happening across the board. Some 12% of special needs assistants are gone and there is no miraculous cure in the education system. Children with special needs are still in the system, but the criteria are being enforced very strictly. This will result in 12% of all special needs assistants being sacked by the Government by March.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: As I said, SNAs are allocated according to identified needs. If a child who has the support of an SNA leaves, unless another comes in with an equivalent requirement, the SNA hours will obviously be lost. That is basic.

Senator Pearse Doherty: They are being taken from children in schools.

An Cathaoirleach: The Senator’s point has been made.

Senator Pearse Doherty: Children in schools are losing their SNAs.

Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív: As the Senator should be aware, the purpose of an SNA is to facilitate children to become independent, not to create dependency. Therefore, a child coming in sna naíonán bheaga is very different from one in fourth or fifth class. In some cases, children can become independent. What the Minister has said is very fair and simple — the need identified will be fully addressed. However, where for one reason or another there is no longer a need, obviously we are better off providing resources where there is a need.

The Seanad adjourned at 8.35 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 18 February 2010.

818