Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Women's Rights in Afghanistan - 24th October 2006

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Women’s Rights in Afghanistan - 24th October 2006
Senator Norris: I salute the courage and integrity of Mary Akrami. It is a remarkable example to us who are privileged not to live in such a disturbed society, particularly one which has been disturbed largely by Western intervention. The tragedy of Afghanistan appears to lie in the fact that it has had a history of having proxy wars fought within it by some of the great powers. I also salute the work of Mr. O’Malley and Mr. Hamilton Rogers because at the Irish end, it is very important to have people like them to bring to our attention the kind of situation that Ms Akrami has worked through.
Many people in Ireland, myself included, had our attention first forcibly directed to the dreadful situation in Afghanistan precisely because of the appalling mistreatment of women under the Taliban. We remembered stories of women not being allowed to have cancer operations because the surgeons were male, which was an utter trampling of the most basic of human rights. We did have a horror of that but the military situation is disastrous. This was confirmed everything I heard this afternoon. Afghanistan has never proved itself amenable to this kind of military intervention. The British ought to have known this. They received a bloody nose in the 19th century. Why are they going back for another black eye? The Americans ought to know. They helped establish the Taliban in the first place, a policy which backfired. Will they ever learn not to start winding up these clockwork Trojan horses and sending them out where they just turn around and whack into their own camp?
The military situation is a mess. In respect of the rural areas and the lack of intervention, there is no control over them. As far as I am aware, the remit of the Government in Kabul simply does not run in these areas, although if I am wrong, please tell me. I would be delighted to think there was a central government but I do not believe there is. I do not believe it is even effective within Kabul. If Ms Akrami had the wonderful human idea of starting a walking club in the grounds of a hotel but was forced to stop even that, this tells its own story. One can add to this the situation concerning the opium poppy and the nonsensical idea that they were going to wipe it out. The problem is worse than ever. The market in the US is sucking it in.
Ireland is a small country even though there is a so-called economic miracle in progress. I do not trust miracles and I hope this one lasts. However, at the moment, we seem to be doing well. We have a certain amount of money at our disposal but we cannot simply splash it around in a way whereby we do not know what the result will be. We should learn some very valuable lessons from what Ms Akrami has said here today. At best, much of the financial intervention is wasteful. At worst, as described both by Mr. O’Malley and Ms Akrami, it is a kind of crisis tourism. People who do not speak the language float in with no knowledge of the culture, are very impressed with their own goodness and then bugger off again, having done nothing. One point that may not have been taken up or was perhaps missed by me was one of the most important things said by Ms Akrami. There is a very efficient way of helping in Afghanistan which would, to use the acronym, be “totally safe” from the point of view of Irish personnel and would not risk anything - only a few thousand euro here and there. No personnel would be exposed to the dangers Ms Akrami so bravely endured. It involves agreeing to train people here. As a result of acting decently and in a humane manner, we establish contacts which may be valuable in the future when a proper civil government is established in Afghanistan, as we all hope it is.
This committee has no remit to spend money, except for the odd old trip. However, the Chairman and the committee have influence. It is an all-party committee that does not break down along partisan lines, which is useful. I suggest this committee carefully examines how we can influence the spending of our resources.
I understand the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre is prepared to train people from Afghanistan.
Mr. O’Malley: Yes.
Senator Norris: That should be encouraged at every possible level and this committee should welcome it as a positive action which will help the human reality of people living in Afghanistan.
It should be done for teachers. I used to teach in Trinity. I do not imagine my skills in interpreting Finnegan’s Wake would be of much use in Kabul but other people may be able to train teachers. We have programmes in other countries. Our former President, Mary Robinson, was involved in training. At present, she is involved in training at Columbia University in New York. Such programmes involve training people from communities such as those we are discussing how to influence the government to gain access to basic human rights. We also have programmes for training legal personnel. Let us conduct that training here.
There was reference to this business of sending 12 SUVs which are of damn-all use and I saw my colleague Senator Henry nodding. The best action we could take would be to spend that money to make skills available through programmes here. I hope the Chairman in his vast wisdom will find a form of words at the end of this meeting whereby the committee can encourage this and recommend it to the Government and universities. UCD has a marvellous programme in collaboration with Birzeit University in the West Bank. Perhaps it is with Bethlehem University. It has had a major effect and I would like to see universities here taking it up.

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Foreign Conflicts - 24th October 2006

Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - Presentation on Foreign Conflicts - 24th October 2006
Senator Norris: I apologise as I will have to leave the committee briefly in a few minutes to deal with another matter. I welcome the clear and cogent presentation, which is what we would expect from Mr. Montgomery and his team.
Mr. Jan Pronk is a very distinguished and humane man and I would regret if, despite what may have been an indiscretion, we did or said anything that would further undermine his position. He responded in a very human way to what is a calculated horror perpetrated by a Government on its own people. There should be room for this kind of undiplomatic indignation in the face of such a catastrophe. I would tend to support him.
With regard to support for the African Union forces, is it not the case that many countries, as is typical in these situations, stepped up to the television cameras and claimed they would give all kinds of money but then failed to cough up? We are talking about 17,300 UN troops and 5,300 civilian police. Is there any prospect of the UN being able to raise such an army given that it is having difficulty scraping up troops as it is? I note the reference to 180 military police and technical staff. Are any of these personnel Irish, as I had heard?
I refer to Mr. Montgomery’s comments that although the Darfur peace agreement was wonderful it its way, little had been achieved in terms of implementation. That is true but there is another way of looking at the situation. Much has been achieved in the way of fragmentation, which is disastrous, so that the non-signatories are now fighting among themselves and against their former partners.
I see this as a very human situation because, like my colleagues, I have been briefed on it by constituents who are ordinary Irish people disgusted by what is happening. They have written to inform me of what they know, either at first hand or through reports, of the situation in the camps where the conditions are desperate. As the men are afraid to leave the camps, the women are sent out to gather firewood and other basic essentials. When they go out, they are routinely raped. It should be put on the record that rape is a weapon of war consistently used by and with the approval of the Sudanese Government against its own population. That should be condemned in the strongest possible terms.
There is a further aspect the committee might consider at some stage. I have been approached by a group concerned about investments. China could certainly help to resolve this problem, if it so chose. The reason it does not do so is because it is pursuing its own interests in the area of mineral resources such as oil, gas and so on. A series of shadow companies with names such as China Gas, PetroChina and I do not know what else - I forget their names but Mr. Montgomery and his colleagues will know them - and including companies from the United States and Canada, have a strong interest in what they can get out of this situation.
I have been told it is quite likely the National Treasury Management Agency, which is investing for our pensions, has wittingly or unwittingly invested in these companies. The group that has been lobbying me and others suggested it would be useful to disinvest as this would send a practical signal of disapproval. The group also suggested it is perhaps time - I feel it is time - that we insert into the terms establishing the National Pensions Reserve Fund an ethical framework with regard to funds invested on behalf of the people to provide for our pensions. We all look forward with relish to getting our pensions but at the same there is an argument that we do not want our pensions paid for with dirty money.
I apologise for having to leave briefly. I should be back in five minutes. I do not intend any discourtesy.

Order of Business - 26th October 2006

Order of Business - 26th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I normally agree with Senator Morrissey on transport issues but I was astonished to hear him describe the flotation of Aer Lingus as a success. If the Government wanted to privatise it why did it frustrate Willie Walsh’s attempts to take it over? In the process it lost the business leadership whose lack Senator Morrissey bewails this morning. The Government has got itself into this situation.
I am interested in Senator O’Toole’s comments on salmon driftnet fishing but it would be better if he read the Order Paper where he would see that No.17 has a comprehensive motion in my name-----
Mr. O’Toole: With my name on the bottom of it.
Mr. Norris: That was the point I was coming to. The motion addresses all the problems. The Government has commissioned reports and so on but has never once taken the scientific advice or implemented the conclusions. Ministers have come into this House and been evasive and economical with the truth and suggested they took on board some of the reports but they have never implemented their recommendations.
This is a potential disaster and it would be outrageous if the Government once again buckled in the face of local considerations and pressure. It would be just like the situation that Senator O’Toole and I highlighted last night in which the Government helped to unload 250,000 defective homes on the Irish people because it did not want to disadvantage a section of the cement manufacturing industry that supports it. It would be wrong to allow narrow local considerations to prevent the Government doing what is clearly the right thing.
Last night there was a serious fire in Portland Row, involving a hostel. A total of 11 fire brigades were called, 50 people were evacuated and five people are still in hospital suffering smoke inhalation. We are lucky that there was not considerable loss of life. Would the Leader consider allowing a brief discussion on No. 16 in my name, which draws attention to this fact and asks that the Government ensure that all such accommodation is professionally vetted in terms of fire regulations, hygiene, and so on?
Could the Leader find out from the Minister, or ask him to come into the House to explain, whether this hostel was ever vetted, whether it was fire regulation compliant, how many people were there and what are the conditions in this type of accommodation? This is funded by taxpayers but some people make a great deal of money out of these hostels around the country most of which do not meet elementary safety regulations.
I put down this matter on the Order of Business on 28 September and raised it previously.
Ms O’Rourke: That is right. The Senator did that.
Mr. Norris: There is a tragedy waiting to happen and it will be too late when people are burnt to death. Then we will all lament and bewail the tragedy. We know about it now. I am using this opportunity to serve notice that a tragedy will happen which we can avoid if we implement the proper fire, hygiene and safety regulations.

Private Members Motion on Energy Policy - 25th October 2006

Private Members Motion on Energy Policy - 25th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I would also like to compliment my colleague, Senator O’Toole, on putting down this motion. I know the Senator and Senator Brian Hayes have been pushing this matter. When I was considering it myself, I thought I had struck it lucky because I found something that was so absurd it would grab the attention of the House. Senator O’Toole beat me to it.
I am referring to this extraordinary and shameful Department memo pointed out by the Senator, which states the Department does not want to signal the situation to the outside because it might create some difficulties for hollow block manufacturers. It is staggering that the welfare of the country, our commitment to the Kyoto Protocol and the welfare of people purchasing these homes should be of less significance than a section of the building industry to which, lamentably, this Government appears to be still in thrall. That is something which is utterly shameful and which has not been faced in any contributions. I sincerely hope the Minister of State will have the guts to address the issue and apologise for this utterly shameful and unforgivable attitude. I hope the Irish people get to know a bit about this memorandum, the cynical attitude and the favouring of one section. There was a green cement company here but the Government did absolutely nothing to encourage it because of its commitments to the major cement groups. That is absolutely regrettable.
We are in a boom, and many houses are being built. From time to time the Government compliments itself on the numbers of houses being built. The problem with this is that houses consume much energy and produce various by-products. Buildings of all types account for at least 40% of our energy consumption, with a cost of €3.5 billion a year. As a result, and particularly with the projected rise in mortgages, young people especially will find great difficulties.
I am quoting to a certain extent from an article in The Irish Times by Mr. Frank McDonald from a very fine series of investigative reports. He quotes Sustainable Energy Ireland in estimating the average household’s annual energy bill for electricity and space heating at approximately €1,700. Associated CO 2 emissions are 8.5 tonnes a year for each household. One of the reasons for this is that the building of the houses is not energy efficient, as Senator O’Toole has indicated, particularly with the hollow block construction.
We have known this for a long time. Some ten, 20 or 30 years ago I remember people talking about the need to insulate houses, even just to keep the heat in. We were not worrying about Kyoto at that stage. We have done precious little to address this subject. This places the memo in a singularly cynical condition.
The new regulations were not introduced until 2002, and there was an exemption for planning permissions lodged before the end of the year. The consequence of that was nearly 300,000 homes being built with the old standards. They were energy inefficient. The Government, as I have stated, put the interests of one section of the cement industry above everything else.
We are part of the European Union. Whether it comes early or late, and whether we procrastinate, delay and seek derogations, we will have to face our obligations eventually. The European Union is involved in this area through the performance of a buildings directive. Under that, every house offered for sale or rent will be required to have a building energy rating. It will be just like the labelling spoken of earlier.
Again, this was supposed to come into effect on 1 January 2007 for new houses.
Mr. O’Toole: It was 2006.
Mr. Norris: I stand corrected. Regardless of whether the introduction was 2006, it will not be put in place yet anyway. Cynically, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, got a transitional arrangement agreement, under which construction works for which planning permission was sought on or before June 30 last are exempt, provided they are substantially completed by the end of June 2008. It is another exercise in procrastination, another delivery of a large number of energy inefficient houses on to the market. This is to the detriment of the customers and our obligations.
We have mentioned the Kyoto Protocol. We have already had to buy €185 million of carbon credits. If this matter is not properly addressed, it is estimated we could pay up to €5 billion in a few years’ time. That is a big bill for the taxpayer.
The general standard is still relatively low because nothing has been done. This is another area in which the Minister could be involved in, part L of the building regulations. That section deals with energy efficiency. Nothing has been done to strengthen the area since we adopted the current version in 2002. It will not be revised until 2008, as once again an option not to do so was exercised by the Government. It has again weaselled out of it, deliberately avoiding the targets set.
This makes the amendment to tonight’s motion one of the most laughable I have ever seen in this House. Senator O’Toole is completely correct. The penultimate paragraph has the gall to congratulate “the Government for its prompt action in implementing the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive”. Is the Government stark raving mad? How can it congratulate itself on actions it has not taken? It is congratulating itself on an absolute dereliction of duty in this area. I am surprised even the brass necks on the other side of the House are prepared to try to pull this one off.
The issue does not just concern homes, but businesses. There are a significant number of new office blocks, particularly in Dublin. These are not especially energy efficient. Office blocks, by and large, consume twice as much energy as naturally ventilated alternatives. I do not want to be seen to attack authority all the time so I wish to acknowledge that Fingal County Council has produced an environmentally friendly building in the shape of Fingal County Hall. It is energy efficient and the type of building we could construct everywhere instead of environmentally destructive buildings.
I have spoken about the way the Government, for its own reasons which may be fairly murky, favour one sector of the cement industry over another to the disadvantage of the green cement sector. The cement industry represents a highly carbon-intensive part of our industrial framework and is the second largest industrial source of emissions. It emits into the Irish atmosphere one tonne of CO2 for every tonne of cement it produces. A tonne for a tonne is a staggering statistic but it can be reduced and has been reduced by up to 300,000 tonnes per annum, or 7%.
In 1990, when wooden houses were first constructed, they represented 1% of the total but that figure now stands at 27%. In a few years it will be 50%. Senator Kitt might have been correct that in the early days they were relatively expensive, but they are now cheaper as well as more efficient than other methods of construction. They are much more comfortable to live in, being cool in the summer and warm in the winter. They can also be built much more rapidly than other forms of house.
Information on wastage in buildings and on suggested alternatives was communicated to the Government by Mr. McCaughey, who also drew attention to the Government’s obligations, in the course of evidence to the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government. He said:
Although I sent my original letter to the then Minister, Deputy Dempsey, informing him of the British Government Departments’ research on 4 February 1998, nothing was done about it until 1 January 2003. During those five years, a staggering 250,000 houses were built to a standard of energy efficiency that was 35% below what it should have been.
Again, this was a bad deal for the country, the house buyer and the house owner and something of which this Government should be thoroughly ashamed.
I commend Senator O’Toole on putting this motion on the Order Paper. I am astonished at the gall of the Government in tabling such an unrealistic and not entirely honest amendment. It is about time we faced up to our obligations to our young people trying to buy decent houses that will not bankrupt them in energy costs nor spoil the environment. I congratulate the Senator.
Mr. Brady: I second the amendment. I welcome the Minister of State and the opportunity to discuss this issue as a member of the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government. The issue arises regularly and has been discussed with most of the stakeholders involved. My experience with the committee tells me that huge strides have been made in recent years. By the introduction of firm but fair policies over the past ten years, we have made huge progress. The figures speak for themselves.
Mr. Norris: They certainly do.
Mr. Brady: Emissions from the average dwelling have fallen by 30% in the past 14 years and are on target to fall by over 50% by the time we have to meet our commitments under Kyoto. That is a sign of prudent Government.
A certain amount of hysteria surrounds these issues. For example, approximately 250,000 native Irish are employed by the construction industry. If we were to interfere with that or try to change regulations governing certain areas of the industry just because some people do not like them, we would do a disservice not only to ourselves but the country. When so many people are employed in an industry, it must be strongly regulated.
Mr. Norris: Could they not be employed building better houses?
Mr. Brady: We are on target to fulfil commitments made even by previous Governments. At EU level, Ireland has led the way in many cases.
Mr. Norris: Why do we have to buy carbon credits?

Statements on the White Paper on Irish Aid - 25th October 2006

Statements on the White Paper on Irish Aid - 25th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I too welcome the Minister of State, who made a very energetic and useful contribution to the debate on this subject by the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs on 10 October. I would like to pick up on one or two things said there. One significant matter perhaps not yet mentioned in this debate was the Government suggestion that the committee be renamed the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs and Aid. That has been universally welcomed, since it helps to place at the centre of foreign affairs the commitment of the Government and the people to aid programmes. It was very heartening to hear from the Minister of State that the ten new member states of the European Union are sending delegations to Ireland on a weekly basis to learn how they might construct similar programmes. It is flattering that it should happen.
The Minister of State also stated that we have made a significant contribution, and some other European and world states are watching what we are doing and following on our coat-tails. That too is a good thing, showing that we are becoming a headline community in the area. I also welcome the idea of creating a dedicated unit for conflict analysis and resolution. We are in the end game in the North of Ireland, and we may have learnt some lessons useful to the rest of the international community.
The development of a hunger task force was also mentioned. However, underlying all those issues and much of the conflict throughout the world is a catastrophic population explosion to which very few people nowadays refer; it is simply not fashionable. From the time I entered university to now, a matter of approximately 40 years, the global population doubled. That inevitably produces strains regarding overcrowding, competition for resources, international conflict and so on, and it must be addressed.
The Minister of State also mentioned the establishment of a governance unit to ensure that aid given is properly applied. I was very interested but also sorry to see that in the full White Paper he refers to the disastrous situation in the Congo, where he has said the aid was useless. I would have liked a little more information on that, since it is helpful to know why it is useless. It is devastating to state that millions of euro were sent to that tragic country without anything happening except that it was all sequestered away. I would like to know how, why, where and when that happened and what we can do to address matters regarding governance.
I welcome the commitment to raise aid contributions to 0.7% of GDP by 2012. However, I remember commitments being given in this House regarding which, when we on this side poked the Government, we were told that they were not absolute. How absolute is this commitment?
I remember Deputy O’Donnell making a passionate appeal in the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs that this not be decided yearly but built into the heads of financing so that it is structural. I do not believe that it has been done, but I would like it to happen. Although the Taoiseach is intent on going the full run, one never knows what might happen. There could be an accident; stranger things have happened. There might even be a different Government after the next election, and one Government’s commitments are not always fulfilled by another. I would like this stipulated structurally to clarify that our commitment is real.
Another very important point is that, as the Minister of State said, we are now a very wealthy country. Although in absolute terms our contribution may not be as substantial as that of which other countries are capable, there will be a considerable increase, and now is the time for us to plan. We must have trained personnel on the ground to ensure that these programmes can be delivered. As the Minister knows, in the past in the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs we have been told that there is no point in our increasing aid in financial terms because we lack sufficient trained personnel for delivery. We must examine that now and ensure that we have them.
I recently attended some meetings with the Irish Family Planning Association, which the Minister of State will know is affiliated to the UNFPA. I commend the Government on its strong and continuing support for the latter organisation, which is vitally important for precisely the reasons listed by Senator Terry. There is ecclesiastical interference from both ends of the spectrum, extreme Protestants on the one hand, and the Vatican on the other, to impede certain programmes. That is wrong, and it is very important that Ireland at least continue to lend its moral support. It is welcomed by Members across the party spectrum in both Houses.
At one of our meetings we referred to President Bush’s cutbacks. From a very primitive perspective, he is cutting back in areas such as contraception. We should appeal to him not to make an absolute cut. He is in control and he will have ideas, but he should invest any shortfall in other areas. For example, my colleague, Senator Henry, pointed out that in certain African regions that she visited, she was astonished by the high maternal morbidity rate. One reason was the degree of haemorrhaging. She witnessed such situations and could not believe that a woman might die from such a minor flow of blood. However, when shown the haemoglobin counts, she realised that even a small haemorrhage was disastrous for women in such circumstances. That can be countered very simply by adding iron to the diet. President Bush, even if he is not prepared to pay for condoms, should make the surplus available to save the lives of women in childbirth if he is the kind of Christian about which he is always proclaiming.
Senator Kitt referred to the situation in Darfur. It is a very worrying trend, and the peace agreement has led to the fragmentation of forces, making matters worse, since former allies are now attacking each other. In the camps there is the horrible situation that the men are terrified to go out, instead sending the women to collect firewood, only for them to be routinely raped. The Sudanese Government is directly responsible for the use of rape as a weapon of war against women. It is disgusting and repulsive, and that should be made clear to the authorities in question.
Yesterday I raised the issue of disinvestment. I understand that the Department will be entertaining the Sudan Disinvestment Campaign. There are several firms, including Chinese petroleum companies and Canadian and American investment companies, as well as some that even have Irish connections. Since they operate through shell companies it is not always clear who are the owners. Through the National Treasury Management Agency, which controls substantial sums from our pensions, we have been investing in companies that support and prop up the Sudanese Government. The group has suggested including an ethical investment clause in the NTMA’s terms of reference. I have spoken to colleagues across the party spectrum in both Houses and they are in favour. I would like the Minister of State to speak to his colleague in the Department of Finance about that.
Among the good points in the White Paper was the high priority accorded HIV-AIDS, women’s health and gender issues. However, those issues always seem to be discussed in terms of reproductive rights. Let us insert the word “sexual”, since that word needs to be there; sexuality must be mentioned. It is not only a matter of violence against women, something on which the Minister of State is absolutely right, since there is also violence against gay men. A situation in Iran may not have a direct link with Irish Aid, but it illustrates that this type of violence is global. In Iran, two lovely young men were savagely and brutally murdered because of their sexual orientation. It is not just women who are on the receiving end of violence.
In the context of HIV-AIDS, there is no mention of gay men in the White Paper. Women are mentioned. I remember speaking ten years ago at an interparliamentary union conference in India where I remarked on the absence of any reference to homosexuality, gay men, the gay community etc. While I know homosexuality is a sensitive issue, I warned the conference that the issue was a time bomb. If we give in and do not include sexuality and homosexuality in our White Paper, the others will regard our omission as acceding to their view. Colleagues of mine on the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and members of our political group who support the UNFPA have said many countries assert there are no gay men in their countries. That is rubbish. The issue needs to be examined.
It is a pity there is no mention in the White Paper of our commitment under the 28-year programme of action, POA, adopted by the international conference on population and development in Cairo. There is also no reference to the fourth conference on women in Beijing and no specific mention of the UNFPA. Will the Minister take another look at this and include a statement of support for the UNFPA?
Senator Kitt mentioned the useful meeting the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs had yesterday where the issue of Darfur was raised. There was also a very interesting presentation by a courageous Afghani woman, Mary Akrami, who was sponsored by an Irish group called SAFE. Ms Akrami made some very valid points about the waste of money. She pointed out that many European countries send people to Afghanistan who do not speak the language or know the culture and who remain for six weeks and then go home. I call this crisis tourism.
We should consider carefully the point Ms Akrami made that what would really help is the kind of assistance being offered by the Rape Crisis Centre which has offered to train Afghan personnel in counselling and in managing the repercussions of a rape situation. This gives better bang for our buck. It is also safer because we retain our Irish personnel in our community exposed to no danger while passing on skills to courageous Afghani and other people who will bring them back to their countries.
This approach is also in our interest because if matters improve, these people will turn out to be leaders of their community and, perhaps, leaders of their country. We must be civilised, generous and flexible and not always insist the money is earmarked for overseas or that we must send so many people abroad to do an academic programme. That is hogwash. We should bring people to this country and train them.
One thing I like about the Minister of State is that he is prepared to take a bit of a risk, to think unconventionally and break the boundaries. This is something that could help make his name. He should look again at this area and decide “Yes”, that in addition to sending money abroad, he will institute programmes in universities, medical faculties, hospitals and centres such as the Rape Crisis Centre. He should decide to support people by giving them the skills to deal with disastrous situations in their countries.
I welcome the White Paper which I believe is useful and welcome the change of name mentioned. I have some reservations, but they are not matters on which I find myself in contradiction with the Government. On the question of Congo, for example, I only seek further and better particulars. I have also suggested that when the paper mentions gender-based violence, it should automatically include gay people because we are such a target throughout the world. Ireland’s relatively decent attitude in this area puts us in a position to include this reference, which would invite praise rather than ridicule.
I welcome the White Paper and the implications of its publication. I welcome the change of the name of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Irish Aid. I also welcome the measures included in the paper to supervise the aid we give. I compliment the Minister of State and the Government on continuing their support for the UNFPA. This is critically important, especially in circumstances where powerful groups such as the Bush Administration shamefully cut back on funding because they object, on allegedly moral grounds, to the inclusion of contraception education, etc. This makes it even more vital that the Minister of State makes it clear to the international community our continuing and unwavering support of the remarkable and valuable work done by the UNFPA.
Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. C. Lenihan): I thank Members for their strong engagement with the development issues that are my responsibility in Irish Aid. I reaffirm that the White Paper is about reiterating, reaffirming and confirming our commitment to achieving our 0.7% target by 2012. One might well ask why we do not legislate for this. We have decided legislation is not a good precedent to set in this area because then the Government would come under pressure from other interest groups to legislate for their area. For these reasons, it is deemed inappropriate to legislate for the commitment.
The Minister for Finance and his Department have backed our commitment with hard cash. For example, in the two years since I have been in charge of this portfolio, our emergency and recovery budget has gone from €20 million to €60 million. This is likely to increase further following the Estimates to be published at the end of the month. We are meeting our targets. When I decided to reverse the commitment of 2007, I felt it was important to set down clear milestones against which the public and the Oireachtas could gauge whether we were meeting our commitments.
These milestones were an interim target of 0.5% in 2007, 0.6% of gross domestic product, GDP, in 2010 and finally the achievement of 0.7% in 2012. We are well on the way to achieving that. For a coincidence of reasons, this year we will achieve 0.5%. This is mainly because of a contribution from the Department of Finance of €60 million, a commitment which should have been made over a number of years but which was front-loaded into one year because of a commitment to multilateral debt relief. Even when this is taken out of the equation next year, we will maintain our commitment of 0.5%.
We are meeting our targets and there is no question of the commitment not being met. I have full confidence that even if there is a change of Government, something I do not anticipate, Members opposite will be more than willing to meet the commitment. The target is realistic and achievable, whereas the previous target was neither and had to be overturned.
Senator Terry raised the issue of moneys being spent on NGOs in Central America. I visited Nicaragua, Central America and South America. It is important to remember that while Ireland concentrates its aid in eight programme countries, six in Africa and two in Asia, we support projects in approximately 128 countries. We support projects across the globe without prejudice. Much of this support is led by the good work done by our missionaries and I am sure Senator Terry saw that when she made her visit to Latin America. Our missionaries are there and they also have a footprint in Asia. We make our contributions in that area.
Senator Kitt raised the issue of Sudan. The Minister and I were answering questions in the Dáil on the issue less than an hour ago. We are anxious to facilitate a Dáil or Seanad debate on the situation. What is going on is horrific. Prime Minister Blair has organised a conference which it is hoped will have some effect. The Minister and I have been to Darfur where we have met Ministers and Prime Ministers. However, as the Minister said in the Dáil, one really needs to affect the President of Sudan if we want to achieve real change. Thankfully, he will attend the conference organised by Prime Minister Blair. We need to maintain focus and pressure on him to accept the deployment of a strong multilateral force to protect the people there. The situation has worsened.
In that context, Senator Kitt also raised the issue of security for NGOs. In the wake of the tragic death of Margaret Hassan in Iraq, I initiated a security review of our overseas aid personnel so that they would be aware of dangers in the field. Owing to recent events in Darfur and elsewhere, I am of a mind to offer the same security advice and assistance to NGO personnel when they return at Christmas. I hope to organise this during Christmas and the new year because NGO personnel work in dangerous situations where the Government and governmental actors cannot be present for various reasons.
We are keen to add to NGOs’ capacity to continue their good work. It is not often pointed out that Ireland gives €100 million to NGOs every year. This money goes to Irish-based NGOs predominantly, but we also support international NGOs, such as the Red Cross, that are important in crisis situations.
I agree with Senator Norris regarding enhancing local capacity rather than bussing out Irish people. This has been the approach of Irish Aid. While domestic governments and employees of NGOs working in the tsunami-affected regions complained about people crowding in, giving unneeded blankets and providing unwanted and unfocused help, this criticism was not made about Irish NGOs, which are effective.
The mainstay of our support for the Red Cross and many international NGOs that play a part in emergency situations relates to raising local capacity. We fund the Red Cross in particular to enhance capacity locally for emergency preparedness. The approach is-----
Mr. Norris: What about training people in this country?
Mr. C. Lenihan: -----being followed. We agree with the thrust of the Senator’s comments about bringing people to Ireland to avail of the excellence on hand, but we prefer to deliver training locally because it can be expensive. Where appropriate, we try to seek out centres of excellence near or in the region in question.
We are proud to remain a strong funder of the UNFPA notwithstanding the criticism of that agency, none of which is based on evidence. Frequently, I receive letters from domestic and international groups on this subject stating that we fund all sorts of services, but that is not the case and the UNFPA does not carry out those services. For example, it does not support or fund the one child policy in China, a main focal point of the criticism we receive.
The UNFPA is a good agency and enjoys our total confidence in its work to date. It is central to the empowerment of women, gender issues generally and the provision of health, sexual and reproductive advice. I apologise to Senator Norris that we did not use the phrase “sexual and reproductive rights” in the White Paper, but we are not shy about using the word “sexual”. The Senator knows that I mention sexual and reproductive rights in virtually every speech I make.
That certain donors, including the United States of America, have pared back funding for anti-AIDS programmes involving the use of condoms in some countries, such as Uganda, is of concern. We are not one of those donors. European donors and those of like mind to the Irish have made up the shortfall, but the Ugandans have accepted the other donors’ conditional support and President Museveni is of an opinion that may not be shared by the international donor community. However, we are ploughing ahead in providing assistance in respect of sexual and reproductive rights undeterred by these changes in the landscape.
We are aware of the AIDS situation confronting homosexual males and the gay community in general. At an international conference I attended in London a few months ago, this issue arose in respect of Asia more than Africa. There has been a startling upsurge in AIDS cases in Asia because of economic growth and changing sexual practices, that is, people engaging in both homosexual and heterosexual sex but not informing others of or being unaware of the health implications. This is a phenomenon in Asia rather than Africa, where the focus is on an alarming increase in the number of women affected by the virus. Part of our programme will address this issue.
Our aid is predicated on social interventions in terms of health, education and hunger. The purpose of the hunger task force is to give an international and domestic lead. Hunger and food security issues and the deeper matter of rural development and making African farming practices more productive are of concern. We all know the history in question. For example, India’s recent success was built on the green revolution of the 1950s when the nature of farming changed radically and more productivity was introduced to the methods. However, that has not been the African case and we are keen to determine how to improve the situation in terms of removing the dependence on external donors’ assistance, be it food assistance or cash to buy food in local markets. We want to ensure that local and regional markets are strong enough for people to feed themselves, which is a basic requirement. It is a tragedy that, during the past 20 to 30 years, all international donors have ignored this subject.
Ireland hopes to take the lead through the creation of the hunger task force and I hope to make announcements regarding its terms of reference and chairman in the next month or two. We will announce the full membership at the beginning of 2007 with a mandate to report in six months and provide international leadership. Many people at the international level are hopeful that Ireland will take a necessary lead. Kofi Annan, who is facing into retirement, wants to address this matter because a green revolution has not occurred in Africa. As an African, he is keen to see international efforts focused in this regard.
We have doubled our spending to tackle AIDS to €100 million. Together with the 0.7% by 2012 target announced at the UN, this was one of the bravest decisions made by the Taoiseach in consultation with me. We did so owing to the issue’s absorption capacity, that is, it can absorb money. Dr. Peter Piot of UNAIDS referred to an €8 billion shortfall in AIDS funding and it is in this respect that we want to provide leadership. Deputy Gormley was present for the announcement and stated in the Lower House that the considerable applause received by the Taoiseach made it heartwarming to be an Irish citizen. The applause came from across the board and may have been the most generous response to any statesman addressing the UN summit on AIDS. Ireland is taking the lead and people, including the Irish public, are watching how we deploy and spend money.
As we increase spending to meet the 0.7% target, we are approaching a medium-term review of our staffing requirements. We were fortunate to receive 20 extra staff as an immediate short-term response from the Department of Finance. In our last Estimates campaign, the Department saw the merits of my argument that we needed those people immediately. Some 14 of the 20 staff will be involved in the monitoring and evaluation of our growing programme directly and all of the 20 are present to meet the short-term need of ensuring that the programme is well evaluated and monitored and that taxpayers’ money is spent appropriately.
The medium-term needs include the level of staffing required to meet the programme’s significant expansions. This year’s allocation is €732 million and, while the Estimates have yet to be published, Irish Aid’s spending will probably exceed €800 million next year. By 2012, the allocation will be €1.5 billion, a considerable amount that must be deployed appropriately. I am anxious to do so in a planned fashion.
I accept contributors’ statements that we must involve more people who are not involved in the Irish aid programme, be they members of NGOs or volunteers. In the new year, we will announce a number of measures in respect of volunteering, a one-stop shop as it were, to advertise the opportunity for Irish people to volunteer. That is hugely important because for this first time in our history we in Ireland have the human capacity as well as the financial resources to make a difference and to play our own personnel into the picture in a much more meaningful way.
We are keen to do something in the third level sector, which is beloved of Senator Norris. We published a strategy document with the Higher Education Authority, which will be the central focal point for our efforts and our engagement with the third level sector. There has been the phenomenon in the past year or two of various universities and third level institutions coming to us with bold and imaginative proposals, all of them dependent of course on securing funding. We are anxious that whatever we do with the third level sector is coherent and properly organised and orchestrated in that sense. We have chosen the Higher Education Authority to be the focal point through which our engagement with the third level sector will occur. Of course that does not stop institutions coming to us with their projects which may not fit into that.
This process will be twofold. At education level, we want to deepen public understanding, both academic and non-academic, of development issues. We are facing into a busy year, where we want to broaden the knowledge of what we are doing in Irish Aid, plus deepen the existing knowledge of development issues within our institutions and among the citizenry. A broadening and deepening of that knowledge will occur between now and 2012.
We will spend a great deal of money on public information campaigns, particularly on the White Paper and on where the money is being spent, and we will continue that in the new year and onwards to 2012. The information campaign will not be excessive, but at this point, given the amounts of money involved, the public should have a strong knowledge of how that money is being spent. We hope the debate will mature, as it has in other areas, where people get a full understanding of the issues that face us. It is easy for people to point to local needs such as in the health or education services in Ireland and ask why we are spending all this money abroad when we could spend it at home, but it is part of our international responsibility.
I will publish the human development index in the next month or so. The UN has asked us specifically to launch the index in regional terms. It brings good news for Ireland, we are climbing up the index again. We were eighth when it was published last year. Although I have not received the full report, I understand from the draft reports and indications that we are climbing even higher in wealth terms. With that wealth comes considerable responsibility, moral and otherwise, and we should not be afraid to step up to the line in the area of development. It is altruistic and charitable work. Irish aid is untied and therefore not given with a specific geopolitical or other immoral purpose. We are not an arms supplier. We do not see ourselves as a major player in any of those settings.
We are a moral voice in the world and the White Paper places development at the heart of our foreign policy. We are not delinking from foreign policy. Some other European countries have separated their development assistance programme into an agency type status but we do not favour that for Irish Aid. The name change was important because it reaffirms the role of the Department of Foreign Affairs. The White Paper, in substantial terms as opposed to the name change which is superficial at one level, puts development assistance at the heart of our foreign policy. Let us be straight and honest about the fact that Ireland is influential on the world stage because of its policy on development. People take a leaf from what we do. We listen and are listened to, and we are welcome in various settings across the world precisely because of what we do on the development aid side. The proof of that in a real sense was when my senior colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, was chosen as the only developed country representative to be a UN envoy. That was unusual and is reflective of the strong role we play in development. It is recognised, by Kofi Annan and the UN generally that Ireland is a model UN member and we hope to continue as such. The area of development assistance is where we can prove to be the best and show the kind of leadership which is wanted by everybody in this House, irrespective of party political or no political affiliation. They want us to show a lead because, with Irish people, it comes not just from the heart, but from the head.
I am proud to be part of this expansion in the programme. I know it will enjoy cross-party support in the future. We need to rally around on a cross-party basis to support this. Notwithstanding our obvious wealth, when one considers the deficiencies in infrastructure and continuing pockets of poverty here, it would be easy and open to the unscrupulous political operator to simply state we should cut back on Irish aid and put it into domestic areas. It is important there is an all-party approach to ensure we, as parliamentarians and citizens of the world, can robustly make the point that aid can work and it is valuable for a country to spend large amounts of money in this area.

Order of Business - 25th October 2006

Order of Business - 25th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I support the calls for a debate on salmon drift net fishing. I raised this matter previously, as have other Members, over many years. We know, for example, that the Government previously received scientific advice which it did not accept. The situation on fish stocks is now regarded as catastrophic, according to an independent group headed by Professor Tom Collins which has made a clear recommendation that drift netting should cease altogether. Although this is not required, the group also has suggested the provision of €30 million plus to compensate for the hardship of displaced fishermen. We should use a debate in this House to urge the Government to accept at last the scientific recommendations.
With regard to the tragic recent road accident, I send my condolences to the grieving families and community. I stated two years ago in this House that a clear profile was emerging and, tragically, at least some elements have been borne out by that dreadful accident. The profile is of young men travelling at speed on country roads in the early hours of a weekend morning, sometimes with drink taken. There were five or six elements, which I listed previously, and therefore we know the target group. There is a possibility, as Senator Brian Hayes stated, of installing a governor in cars. There is also a commercial product available, a device fitted to a car, that will alert parents immediately, wherever they are, to the fact that their car is being driven at excessive speed. This is a matter that we need to look at again.
This is quite a historic day. I have just come from the launch of an important document in the National Library. It was launched by the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy de Valera. It relates to a programme called Making Your School Safe and it has the endorsement of all the teaching unions, the Department of Education and Science, etc. It is about the alarmingly high levels of homophobic bullying in schools. This is a very destructive issue for young people and often it carries on into adult life with tragic consequences. In the past week, I have been dealing with two serious cases of bullying of adults in the workplace on this basis. It is time this was brought to an end. I was very proud of this country to sit in the National Library an hour ago as two young confident, courageous and articulate schoolgoing people - one man and one woman - talked about their experiences and demanded the right to be treated equally. The young man said somebody known to him had been bullied so much at school that he had to be hospitalised. He then left the school and education. That is a reproach to all of us.

Statements on the Mental Health Commission Report 2005 - 19th October 2006

Statements on the Mental Health Commission Report 2005 - 19th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I thank Senator Browne for sharing his time with me. This is an important opportunity for us to make statements and express views on the sensitive topic of mental health.
In the old days, people with mental difficulties were regarded as a pariah group. We should look with gratitude to that great figure, Dr. Jonathan Swift, Dean of St. Patrick’s, who founded St. Patrick’s Hospital. He made it clear there was such a thing as mental illness that was parallel to physical sickness and that no shame should attach to it. Prior to that, there was the Bedlam Hospital where people with mental illness were regarded as subhumans who could be taunted and provoked, who would foam at the mouth and entertain the visitors, a very callous view.
Despite changing attitudes, there is still a danger of stigmatisation, particularly an association between wickedness and crime and disease and illness. That is why I put the question of Thornton Hall at the forefront of my contribution. It is a move away from the situation we had with the Central Criminal Lunatic Asylum in Dundrum, a dreadful Dickensian place. I question the wisdom, however, of placing a mental hospital in the grounds of a prison because of the danger of association between the two institutions, both run by the State in the same grounds, which may form an association in the mind of the public. This is resented by those who access these services and I have been lobbied by both individuals and groups who feel this is very counterproductive, even though it may be efficient in terms of saving money. We must be careful we do not stigmatise this group of people.
We all have an interest in this because a report produced by Millward Brown makes the astonishing statement that nearly 70% of people in this country have some association with mental illness in respect of spouses, relatives and friends. This affects all of us.
There are novel approaches and I commend to the Minister of State the approach being taken in Trinity College. The Unilink initiative allows for people with a degree of mental illness or disability to enter third level education. It is marvellous to think that people are having their talents drawn out, that is what education really means. They receive help from mentors, staff and students, to cope with and manage their academic and social lives. This is being a good neighbour and I am proud that Trinity College has pioneered this and several other third level groups are doing the same. If we want to get people out into the community, this is a good way to do it.
Dr. Elizabeth Dunne, of the department of applied psychology in UCC, highlighted difficulties in a report published by the Mental Health Commission that surveyed people using the services. One of the main difficulties is time lag. If a person suffering from mental illness has a crisis, it is an immediate situation. One person indicated that he was very bad in May, asked to see a psychiatrist right away but was told he would have to wait until August.
A surprisingly high proportion of admissions were involuntary - 22% according to Dr. Dermot Walsh, former inspector of mental hospitals. It is, therefore, important to listen to the voice of those who have been through that experience. They recalled the experience as traumatic, involving inordinate force and, once they were in, they were suffocated by lack of privacy, exercise, fresh air and things to do if one does not smoke or watch television. We must take such criticism into account.
Young people are very vulnerable in a rapidly changing society in which gender roles are blurring and they can be easily confused. I support the move to provide an opportunity for young people to refer themselves without parental consent. Sometimes a young person in distress does not want the family involved because it may be the source of the trouble. Confidentiality is necessary. As Senator Browne pointed out, 11,000 present for self-harm in 2003 and we have a very high suicide rate.
We must act on what emerged in the recent survey on Irish attitudes to sexuality in The Irish Times. We do not have a proper education programme on the reality of sexuality, principally heterosexual but also with a component for young gay people who are subject to pressure. There is a multiplier in mental health statistics related to gay people.
There is also the problem of what happens to the young people who present themselves. There are only 20 beds in the State for young people and the system cannot cope. A doctor was quoted as saying that any time a colleague wants to admit a child, it is a huge issue for them because there are only 20 beds. She pointed out that the State has had five years to prepare for this.
(1 o’clock)
It is almost a cliché to cite cases involving the use of trolleys. In one case, however, a child was held for seven days on a trolley in an accident and emergency department. If a person in these circumstances has a pain, he or she will be able to put up with it and may even be distracted by all the fuss and bother taking place but this is the last thing a person with mental illness needs.
A further problem is the failure to implement certain aspects of the Planning for the Future document, published in 1984. The multidisciplinary team approach has still not been fully implemented 20 years after it was proposed. It must be completed.
Senator Browne referred to the poor physical environment in the mental health service. I found it heartening that, in parallel with criticism of places such as St. Ita’s, in which we have all indulged for having peeling paint, blocked lavatories and poor conditions generally, the report pays tribute to nursing staff. I express my appreciation to the staff of mental health institutions who, in difficult circumstances and sometimes squalid conditions, provide wonderful standards of professionalism. It is for this reason I welcome the opportunity to give support to professional care workers in the area of mental health. The House will do all in its power to strengthen the hand of the Minister in securing access to extra funds and facilities and to ensure this vulnerable group of people is looked after.
Ireland has an unusually high rate of schizophrenia when placed in an international context. Several years ago, I was approached by Schizophrenia Ireland asking if it could link into Bloomsday. I agreed to its request and indicated I would provide any assistance I could because of James Joyce’s daughter, Lucia. At that stage, Schizophrenia Ireland had not heard of Lucia Joyce but it subsequently designated 26 July Lucia Day. I will place on record the words of James Joyce who is often regarded as a cynical, distant man, a kind of remote, literary lion. In 1936 Joyce was spending money hand over fist to try to assist his daughter, Lucia. His friends started criticising him because of the expenditure. In a wonderful letter he wrote that he knew he was being criticised for spending “that precious metal”, money, on trying to find a cure for “the most elusive disease known to man and unknown to medicine”. Referring to his daughter, he added that if one were where she was and felt as she must, one would at least experience some hope if one knew one was neither abandoned nor forgotten. What a wonderful, humane letter and marvellous description of the mystery of mental illness, an illness known to man and, nowadays, only partially known to medicine

Adjournment Debate on the Seanad Electoral Register - 18th October 2006

Adjournment Debate on the Seanad Electoral Register - 18th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I express my gratitude to the staff of the House. I had not anticipated this debate would be called so early. Like everyone else, I had expected a vote at 7.15 p.m. and I was meeting a guest when they managed to contact me. I am grateful for their usual efficiency.
The matter I wish to raise has been advertised in The Irish Times and elsewhere. Regrettably, as a result of human error, a considerable number of electors in my constituency have been disenfranchised. A register is kept in the alumni and Seanad electoral offices and information is gathered on an annual basis. The alumni file is used to generate the Seanad electoral register and contains information such as the name and address of the elector, degrees held by the elector, the year in which the first degree was conferred and the elector’s Seanad electoral number.
Seanad electoral claim forms are routinely given to graduates at their graduation ceremonies. If my recall is correct, I was responsible for introducing this. It used not to be automatically given and graduates had to claim it. I ensured these would be given to graduates automatically as I felt it was in my interest to see the constituency growing. The constituency has grown for a number of years.
Candidates complete the forms and submit them for processing. This is done in a small cramped office by a small and dedicated staff who have done a pretty good job over the years. They firstly check the eligibility of claimants, they then check the student identification number corresponds to the alumnus ID number, create an electronic file, enter the alumnus ID number into it, and enter the claimant’s communications preference - whether they wish to be included in the edition of the register available to the public for commercial use - and then provide the details of the file to the information system in the college with a request to generate the file in order that the Seanad electoral claim flag is populated in the appropriate records. Those are then coded for inclusion in the next publication of the register.
Not later than 31 May this year the Seanad electoral register was published, normally on the weekend preceding 1 June. That is the legally valid register for the election. This year, a situation arose where the person principally responsible had an accident, a file was left on the desk and somebody came in and tidied it away. It was not until the first person returned to the office that she realised something had gone wrong. The reason it was not noticed, because it normally would have been noticed, was that the number of additions in 2006 were 1,361 and they exceeded by 300 the numbers of admissions for the previous year. It appeared, therefore, to be perfectly all right. In other words, there was nothing to automatically alert the authorities that something was wrong. They quickly came across the situation, however, realised a regrettable error had been made and did everything they could to rectify it. I understand they took a certain amount of advice, spoke to the Department and came back with the notion that it was not possible. I believe it is possible. The college has said a new system is being put in practice which will be fully operational in 2008. That may be too late for the 700 out of 2,000 people who were left off the register. It would be intolerable to allow the accidental disenfranchisement of one third of those who were entitled.
If the Taoiseach sticks to his guns and does not call the election until the very last moment, they may just squeak on but the register comes out on 1 June and if the election is held in April or earlier, they will not have a vote. Thus the question remains, what is to be done? This is a Legislature. In an extreme situation an emergency Bill could be rushed through each House in half an hour. That is a possibility and I ask the Government to consider everything to enfranchise those people.
Something else can be done for which there is a precedent, to which I draw the Minister of State’s attention. In 1997, a similar difficulty arose which was generated by the post office not delivering a large number of ballots. An instrument was unearthed, SI 321 of 1997 - Seanad (University Members) General Election (Special Difficulty)(No. 2) Order, 1997. What is this other than a special difficulty? I am sure the Minister has possession of that statutory instrument and knows what it is about. That statutory instrument states that the Minister, notwithstanding section 21 of the Seanad Electoral (University Members) Act, 1937 and paragraph 2 of the Seanad (University Members) General Election Order, 1997, can override that and personally, as Minister, direct that those persons should be enfranchised.
I have given the Minister two suggestions. The first should be to resort again, as was done in the past, to a special order of the Minister varying the Bill, powers which he clearly has, to allow these 700 people to vote or, alternatively, provide special legislation. It could be a short Bill which I have no doubt would be passed unopposed in this House. I appeal to the Minister to do that on behalf of my electorate, and as a politician he will understand the urgency of allowing people to vote in the next general election. That is within the power of this Minister and this Government and I ask him to do it.
Mr. B. O’Keeffe: I make this reply on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche. I thank Senator Norris for raising this matter and for giving me an opportunity to set out the position on an issue which I know is of particular interest to Members of the House.
In accordance with section 9 of the Seanad Electoral (University Members) Act 1937, a registration officer for each of the university constituencies is appointed by the appropriate university governing body and is responsible for the annual revision of their respective registers.
I understand that, due to an administrative oversight, more than 700 valid applicants for inclusion on the current Trinity College register were omitted from it. Under the provisions of section 6(2) of the 1937 Act, only those on the register are entitled to vote. The subsection states, “No person shall be entitled to vote at an election in a university constituency unless he is registered as an elector in the register of electors for that constituency”. The 1937 Act does not provide for a supplement to the register. The register is operative from 1 June 2006 to 31 May 2007.
It is clear in the circumstances that the persons omitted from the present register would not be eligible to vote in a Seanad election while that register remains in force, that is, up to and including 31 May 2007.
In light of the situation, the Minister, Deputy Roche, asked the college to submit a report on the issue and that has now been received. The college has investigated the circumstances involved and has reviewed the existing arrangements for compiling the register. On foot of that review, the report details changes that are being implemented in procedural and administrative practices to ensure an administrative error of this nature will not happen again. The university also confirms that the 700 or so persons involved will be included on the new register which comes into force on 1 June 2007 and will be eligible to vote in any Seanad election subsequent to that date.
In this regard, it is relevant to note the Taoiseach has made it clear on many occasions that this Government has every intention of completing its full term in office. Under Article 18.8 of the Constitution, a general election for the Seanad must take place within 90 days of the dissolution of the Dáil, therefore, in all probability, we are looking at a Seanad poll not earlier than July 2007. On this basis, the register on which the next Seanad general election will be held most likely will be the new register that comes into force on the 1 June next year and not the current register, which is giving rise to the present debate. There is no question but that the omitted names will be included on the new register.
Members of the House will be aware of the work of the all-party group on Seanad reform, which is chaired by the Minister, Deputy Roche. One of the current agenda items is the register for the election of Seanad university members. The Minister, Deputy Roche, this afternoon attended a meeting of the group where the matter was discussed. The group provides an ideal forum in which to consider these kinds of issues.
Senator Norris and others have suggested use of powers under section 164 of the Electoral Act 1992 to attempt to rectify the situation with the current register. Having considered the matter, the Minister, Deputy Roche, is satisfied that, on the information available, the present circumstances are not such as are contemplated by section 164 and therefore he is not in a position to make an order along the lines suggested.
In any event, as the Minister has already made clear, the current register is unlikely to be used for the Seanad general election next year. On the timescale as set out, the new register will be used for that purpose and will include the names of those omitted in error this year.
Mr. Norris: I thank the Minister of State for providing us with the Minister’s response. I do not find it entirely satisfactory because it is a type of wing and a prayer response. We hope the election will not take place early, a hope I fervently share, and that these people will be on the register. However, the Minister of State said that the 1937 Act does not provide for a supplement to the register. It does not exclude it. There is nothing legally to prevent it. He states baldly he is satisfied that on the information available, the mechanism I have suggested does not seem to him to be operable. I would like to have a meeting with the Minister to discuss this issue with him face to face. I hope that can be arranged because it is a very important matter. If there was an election, 700 people would be excluded from an electorate of 50,000. That is a lot of people, almost 2%. I seek a meeting to address the two points I made.

Motion on Pre-Nuptial Agreements - 18th October 2006

Motion on Pre-Nuptial Agreements - 18th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I thank my colleague, Senator O’Toole, for sharing his time with me. When I looked at this matter, I thought it was another facile idea of the Government to amend it. I did not see the point in the amendment. Now I do, having listened to the Minister. The Law Reform Commission is over-burdened. The Minister has commissioned a special report and I take it that this is in response to the debate in the Seanad and the call from Senator Browne. I congratulate him on it. It does the Seanad a great deal of credit and there was considerable coverage in the political columns of this move.
It shows how our society is changing and becoming more sophisticated in its response to change. Until recently, marriage was indissoluble. If that was still the situation, this agreement would undermine it because it involves making an agreement before the marriage in anticipation of its potential dissolution. The pre-nuptial agreement protects people. We have seen the reports in the media about people of substantial wealth both in America and Britain who make these arrangements before marriage to protect themselves against the attentions of gold diggers. That is understandable.
However, we must examine marriage as a whole rather than pick at things piecemeal. Senator O’Toole said the most simple people are entitled to marry. They are not. I am not. Gay people are precluded from marrying even though we are part of the human spectrum. There is also the issue of foreign divorces whereby Irish citizens can be, and are being, disadvantaged. There is an ongoing case at present in which an Irish woman is being divorced by her husband in France. Her husband is a French citizen. She was starting proceedings here but he gazumped her and got into the French courts. The reason is that French courts have a tradition of protecting the male interests more effectively than the interests of the female spouse. We may well be seeing a type of cherry picking taking place, whereby European citizens can move their domicile and can decide, for their own advantage, to initiate proceedings in a court where they would get more favourable treatment. We must examine this situation.
My final point about the amendment is that it contains a final surviving absurdity, that is, it states that the law already gives some recognition to pre-nuptial agreements. However, I heard the Minister say that pre-nuptial agreements are traditionally held to be void by the courts. The Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, is signalling otherwise so perhaps the Minister said that they were previously held to be void. Perhaps the position has changed slightly.
(6 o’clock)
I thank the Chair for allowing me to contribute to the debate. I would prefer this issue, which involves marriage, divorce, pre-nuptial agreements and the rights of same-sex couples, to be dealt with in its entirety.

Statements on the Current Situation in the Middle East - 18th October 2006

Statements on the Current Situation in the Middle East - 18th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I also welcome the Minister of State to the House and I welcome the tone of his speech. It is significantly different from some of the earlier speeches delivered on this subject in this House. I also welcome very much the balanced speech of Senator Mooney, particularly his condemnation of the use of cluster bombs. He is right. That was condemned by the most senior humanitarian official as an international war crime, which is what it is, and those responsible should be brought to justice. I say that as somebody who has traditionally supported Israel. I love that country and I love its people, whom I know well.
I want to make a specific and urgent request to the Minister. I am proud to say that my former partner, Ezra Yitzhak, is an Israeli born native Jewish citizen of Israel who, like many in Israel, is a man of conscience and who opposes the criminal activities of his government. He is involved particularly in the building of clinics providing sheltered housing to the indigenous inhabitants, the native people, of the villages in south Hebron, particularly a village called Al Toani. They have been building facilities for health, sewerage and so on. It has been announced in Al Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper, that the Israeli Government has been under pressure from the international community to demolish some of the illegal settlements. It now proposes to do that. The Israeli military is moving to do that as we speak but for political reasons, in order to counter criticism, the Israeli Government is cynically preparing to instruct the military to demolish clinics and houses in Al Toani. Those communities are under the most severe threat. I ask the Minister to contact Jerusalem through the Israeli ambassador and urgently request that any such action be halted and indicate to them that any such action, which is clearly illegal, will be registered and remembered, and those responsible held to account.
I am glad the question of cluster bombs was mentioned. That was an outrage. The whole adventure in Lebanon was a disastrous mistake. I could not understand how the Israelis could allow themselves to be lured in, and the pretext was nonsensical. Did the kidnapping of two soldiers require the massive invasion, the colossal destruction and the huge loss of life? That from the people who use targeted assassination.
Let us hear it for the very considerable number of Palestinian parliamentary representatives who were kidnapped. They were not arrested or detained. They were illegally kidnapped. I regularly attend the interparliamentary union and have been very lucky to be selected many times. The treatment of parliamentarians, their human rights and their immunity from this sort of action is one of the standard items on the order paper of the IPU yet there was scarcely a peep about it. I was glad the Minister of State mentioned it in his contribution.
Senator Mooney mentioned the cluster bombs. There have been many other events that were clear and gross violations of human rights. I would like the Minister of State and his advisers to ponder this question because I have raised it in the past 18 months to two years in the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, that is, the matter of the external association agreement between Israel and the European Union. There are human rights protocols attached to that which are supposed to be triggered by violations of human rights. Will the Minister of State explain the reason they have not been triggered? Has Ireland played a role in raising that issue in the forum of the European Union? We must be honest. It does a disservice to human rights to attach those kind of provisions to a treaty and then ignore them and treat them with contempt. Those matters should be examined. The situation in the Middle East is not confined to Israel and Lebanon, although that is one of the most urgent cases. The situation in Iraq is very dangerous and is getting worse, as we predicted before the invasion began. This prediction came not only from the Opposition. Senators Ó Murchú, Minihan, Mooney and Dardis stated the same thing. Coalition forces are now getting ready to withdraw and beat a retreat from Iraq. The invasion was not programmed; it was brutal, ham-fisted and blunt.
The withdrawal must be correctly carried out in a regular way. Otherwise, the catastrophe will be even worse. The head of the British army, James Baker and others are choreographing the withdrawal. The old saying in America used to be: “If you break it, you take it.” The Americans are now blaming the Iraqis for the mess. Let nobody forget that they created it. It is reported that levels of torture in Iraq are now worse than under Saddam Hussein. Sunni and Shia groups have confirmed this. How can we be proud of that record and what will we do about it?
Regarding the ludicrous trial of Saddam Hussein, I opposed Saddam Hussein while Ireland sold beef to him for his army so I hold no brief for him. I had a row about human rights in Baghdad. His trial is a farce. Defence lawyers cannot be protected and every so often another is assassinated. The trial is grossly prejudiced and could not continue in a European country because the Iraqi Government has already found him guilty in press statements and has decided what to do with him, namely, kill him. A judge at the trial has been removed because he was believed to be favourable to the defendant. That will make a martyr of Saddam Hussein and this is nothing other than a botched trial.
What is the point of the war on terror? I commend to the Minister and his observers an interesting article in The Irish Times by David Keen, of whom I had not heard until today. The headline states “Winning ’war on terror’ may be irrelevant” and the article confirms some of my nastiest suspicions. It confirms the accuracy of the prophecy made by President Eisenhower in 1957-58 when he stated that the greatest threat to America was not communism but the takeover of the apparatus of government by the military industrial complex. That is what has happened in America under President Bush.
The operations of the American Government often seem to be counter-productive. The stated foreign policy aims of the US are being contradicted by results. We all think President Bush is stupid but he cannot be that stupid. What is behind this policy is very sinister.
The article reads, “tactics which actively promote the strength of the enemy have been widely adopted; they have also been maintained even when it has become clear that, from a military point of view, they are counter-productive”. The reason suggested is a political one. As Hannah Arendt confirmed in her analysis of attitudes in Germany after the First World War, it is very politically effective to have a vague, diffuse enemy that one can blame for everything. It is also usefully economically. The article states:
One key aim has been to make money. US interest in Afghanistan has been inseparable from the oil and gas fields of the Caspian, just as US interest in Iraq has been linked to the oil.
Beyond this, there is the vast US military-industrial infrastructure which burgeoned during the Cold War. In this “war”, too, the (Soviet) enemy was not engaged directly: that would obviously have been suicidal; instead, the casualties were mostly exported to civilians and soldiers in Third World countries hosting proxy wars and to those Americans (often poor, often black) recruited into the proxy war in Vietnam.
This is what is happening in Iraq.
The Minister of State must tell us the truth about Shannon Airport. A number of Senators have consistently raised this matter. It is unacceptable for the Government to answer questions that have not been asked and to respond to statements that have not been made. I never stated I knew that people were brought through Shannon Airport in shackles, although it is possible. What is incontrovertible is that some kidnapping expeditions, whose ultimate product was to yield innocent people to torture in some of the most barbarous regimes in the Middle East, were assisted by refuelling in Shannon Airport. Under international law we are complicit. That was the finding of the Marty report and the Secretary General of the Council of the European Union confirmed it and stated that it was a liability.
I knew that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, would state that he knew nothing about it. I arranged to have the correspondence I sent to the Department of Foreign Affairs and the debates in this House forwarded. I hope this material was used and that the Government was embarrassed. It has every reason to be so embarrassed.

Order of Business - 18th October 2006

Order of Business - 18th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I join with Senator Brian Hayes in calling for a debate on the children’s hospital. Senator Feeney was inaccurate in what she told the House; I am sure it was unintentional. I raised this issue immediately upon learning of it. I did so in light of the fact that there were calls from a group of senior consultants asking that an international peer review panel be established. It would not have caused a big hold-up, it would only have taken three weeks to review the criteria. This was not done.
Archbishop Neill has commented on the issue. As archbishop, his statements have invariably been moderate, considered and balanced. It is important to listen to him when he speaks on an issue like this. We cannot be coerced into agreement. While I believe in the separation of church and State, we need to listen when someone like Archbishop Neill speaks in such tones.
The children’s hospital was closed down and amalgamated with Tallaght Hospital. Undertakings were given at the time but these have now been broken. There is no doubt that this will be a considerable loss to the surrounding area. I live next door to the Mater Hospital and we are living in a traffic jam. Any idiot can see that it is easier to get to Tallaght. If I had any children it would suit me to have the Mater Hospital upgraded and I do not begrudge anything that is brought to the north side of the city.
It is sometimes said that there is no religious boundary in the provision of treatment. This is incorrect and the Mater Hospital is a classic example of this. I raised this when cancer treatment was withdrawn from women on spurious grounds-----
Mr. B. Hayes: So did I.
Mr. Norris: -----that had nothing to do with medicine but everything to do with the completely inappropriate ethical committees that sat in judgment.
Mr. O’Toole: Hear, hear.
Mr. Norris: I do not like Catholic ethical committees. I do not like Protestant ethical committees. Religious sectarianism of any kind does not have a role in this area. The only reason I would support what is described as a Protestant ethos is because it clears those theological conceptions out of the way and places at the centre of treatment the rights and welfare of the patient and the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship. That is an important value which should be open to all citizens of this State, not just Catholics or Protestants.
I want to raise a number of other issues.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach: Other Senators have indicated they wish to speak, Senator Norris.
Mr. Norris: I managed to get an extension of this time by 15 minutes, about which I am sure they will all be pleased.
A Senator: For himself.
Mr. Norris: Not just for myself.
Mr. Ryan: He did it all on his own.
Mr. Norris: These are serious issues. We put forward the idea of the amendment to the Treaty of Amsterdam. We were given certain indications. We were told, for example, that there were only one or two pieces of information. That is wrong. A total of 34 pieces of information were given. We were told it would be hermetically sealed. The American authorities have indicated that this information is being made available to the FBI and the CIA as well. We should reopen this matter.
On a similar issue, we should have a debate on the Shell to Sea campaign. It is not appropriate that the Garda forces of this State should be enlisted in the interests of multinational corporations, particularly ones that have disgraced themselves throughout the world. It is not appropriate to have an elderly woman pushed to the ground and injured.
Finally, could we have some solidarity and respect for this House from our fellow Members? Yet again today the transport committee meets at 2.30 p.m. to coincide exactly with the Order of Business in this House. That is a gross lack of respect for this House. I have spoken to the Government side. I have had informal agreement. We should pull our members out of that committee. It cannot meet if we all show loyalty. It would be in quorate. I am dismayed by some of my fellow Senators who let us down by turning up at the committee and allowing it to function while they treat this House with absolute and total contempt. By collaborating with the committee, they are bringing this House into disrepute.

Committee on Foreign Affairs - White Paper on Irish Aid - 10th October 2006

Committee on Foreign Affairs - White Paper on Irish Aid - 10th October 2006
Senator Norris: I welcome the Minister of State’s very clear and cogent contribution. How firm is the Government’s commitment to 0.7% of GDP for overseas development aid? I welcome very much Deputy Michael D. Higgins’s analysis, which indicates Ireland’s contribution is real, and the public should be made aware of this point. It is something of which we can be proud.
The Minister of State made a number of positive comments. However, I would like to know how firm the Government’s commitment is for a number of reasons. Some years ago in the Seanad, the then Leader, who is not connected to the Minister of State, gave a commitment, which was not lived up to and, under questioning from Senator O’Toole, the Leader stated it was not an absolute commitment. How absolute is the Government’s commitment, given that there will be a general election and it is by no means certain that this Administration will survive or that the current Minister will be in the position in 12 months? I recall the former Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy O’Donnell, making an impassioned speech to the committee suggesting that the commitment should be built in on a statutory basis. I forget the precise mechanism by which this was to be done but it has not been done and, therefore, we need to know how firm this commitment is.
The Minister of State said that although substantial sums are being made available and we have a healthy economy, which is small on the world scale, in gross terms our contribution is not as large as those of larger economies. However, he indicated that because of the wiseness and judicious nature of our choices and the way in which our investment is monitored, other states have tended to follow us. I do not expect him to have this information at his fingertips but he might make it available. It would be useful for the purposes of debate in the Houses if examples could be cited where aid was pioneered in an area by Ireland and subsequently, Denmark, Sweden or another state followed. Such examples would be useful and it would strengthen our argument if we had them.
I very much like and welcome the idea of conflict resolution and analysis. Even humble specimens such as myself are often asked whether any lessons can be drawn from the Irish experience in Africa and elsewhere and it would be useful, in light of our experience, if perhaps we could contribute to bringing more harmony to the planet.
I refer to the hunger task force and the situation in Darfur. I have received a number of communications in this regard and, before the Minister of State arrived, I asked the Chairman if the committee could examine this matter. The issue will be examined at the next meeting. Darfur seriously needs examining and I wonder what contribution Ireland has made. I was absolutely horrified and I cry “shame” on those countries that gave monetary commitments to Darfur but have not lived up to them. That is utterly shameful. My colleague, Senator Leyden, uses the wonderful phrase, “name and shame”, in the Seanad sometimes. These countries should be named and shamed. It is absolutely disgraceful that people go out in public and say they are going to be generous and do not live up to that. How dare they? We need to know who they are.
Underlying many of these problems is the question of population control. The rate of increase in population levels on the planet is appalling and terrifying. This is the key problem that underlies conflict. One has only to consider Dr. Skinner’s experiment with rats to understand the kind of behaviour the human species is exhibiting, which is not unrelated to his experiments. Deputy Higgins referred to water resources which are also a contributory factor, as are conflict, pollution and the destruction of the environment. What else can be expected when the population has doubled in the last 40 years? To use a buzzword, it is not sustainable.
I am sorry that I mistakenly called Deputy Michael D. Higgins a Senator because certain columnists have invented a new animal called Senator Michael D. Norris. I am extremely flattered to be genetically joined with the Deputy who referred to the idea of a separate Ministry which would be worth considering. I was surprised that there seemed to be a certain tictac between the Minister of State and the Chairman, given that this idea was contained in both the Minister of State’s speech and the Chairman’s remarks. I had not heard of this proposal and do not believe any other committee member has heard of it either; therefore, to a certain extent, it has been bounced onto us but that may be no harm as it should be discussed.
Deputy Mulcahy is correct in the sense that if the committee takes on or pretends to take on very large operations, it may distort our other work. If we intend to do this, we need to write it clearly into the terms of reference because it should not just be a cosmetic exercise.
Deputy Allen referred to decentralisation to Limerick. Coincidentally, I heard people comment on this issue on the wireless yesterday. Radio journalists seem apprehensive with regard to the ease with which one can get interviews. For example, people visiting the Department in Limerick - it is as easy to stop off at Shannon Airport as Dublin Airport - may miss out on media exposure when coming to Ireland to discuss matters with it. As this point appears to be causing great hilarity to the Minister of State, I may well have shown my naivete again.
Deputy C. Lenihan: The Senator should not fear for the media.
Senator Norris: That does not bother me in the slightest. Whether the Minister of State has a good or even crushing answer, I will be happy to listen to it.
Chairman: Given the Senator’s forensic analysis, I will clarify the position. I confess there was a connection between the Minister of State and me in the sense that we had both read the report.
Senator Norris: How unusual. I commend the Chairman.

Order of Business - 12th October 2006

Order of Business - 12th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I support what my colleague, Senator Ryan, said about the situation in Iraq. It was the type of thing I said last night during the debate on whether we should transmit information to the United States Government. People talked about democracy but since Mr. Bush’s election, “democracy” is a word which makes me want to puke every time I hear it. We talked about democracy in the European Union and the way the European Parliament found out that what was being done in terms of transferring this information was illegal but what did it do about it? It was referred to the European Court of Justice and it found it to be illegal but it continued to transmit the information. How democratic is that? They are all sucking up to the United States.
Some of us raised these issues before when the Lancet produced figures over a year ago. It said that more than 100,000 had been killed but it was rubbished and the figure is now in excess of 600,000. The methodology was impugned. The methodology is irreproachable in this case which involved professional epidemiologists. There is no question of doubt whatever. However, we should not be surprised by the reaction. The US Government is deeply criminal. It advocates and practises torture, saturation bombing of civilians, assassinations and murder. It has managed to make a complete botch of the trial of its former ally,, Mr. Saddam Hussein. His trial has been vitiated by the way in which it was established. Prejudicial comments were made by the Government there assuming he was guilty before the trial even commenced. A number of advocates of Saddam Hussein were assassinated and then the judge was removed by the Government.
An Cathaoirleach: We cannot have a debate on that matter.
Mr. Norris: I call for a debate on the matter. I found the Leader’s comments on the Trinity College Dublin situation a little difficult to follow but if I am correct-----
Ms O’Rourke: Some 748 votes have vanished.
An Cathaoirleach: That is not relevant to the Order of Business.
Mr. Norris: I beg your pardon, a Chathaoirligh, it most definitely is and you know that and are just being roguish. It is relevant to the Order of Business because I put the matter down as one for the Adjournment debate as I was aware of it. It is quite scandalous and it fits in very much with what Senator Brian Hayes said about deficiencies in the electoral register. This was an administrative error. There is probably approximately one year to go before the general election and there is no reason these 742 graduates could not be included on the register. A statutory instrument was used in a parallel case some years ago and I call on the Minister, as I will during the Adjournment debate which I hope will be taken in the next few days, to ensure these 742 graduates are not disenfranchised.
11 o’clock
The issue of the special savings investment scheme is a scandal. Most of the wealthiest people in this country do not pay any tax. Even our valued and beloved Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, did not seem to pay much tax on the various gifts he received and yet people who have been encouraged to save will be penalised. At the time this scheme was launched, I heard senior members of Government on radio being questioned by concerned members of the public who asked if they would be pushed over the limit if they saved. They were told that would not happen. Those guarantees were given and they must be honoured. This is a sign of meanness on the part of local authorities. It is quite characteristic. I previously raised a case, which the Cathaoirleach may remember, where a blind student got a grant because he was so brilliant to do a PhD in history and the local authority tried to subtract the value of the grant from his blind pension. How disgusting, mean and cheese paring can we get. We in this House have got to stand up for the rights of the little people.

Motion on International Agreements - 11th October 2006

Motion on International Agreements - 11th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I am the first Member, but perhaps I will not be the only Member, to object to this motion, first, because of the way it was bounced on the House without notice, second, it is being taken comparatively late in the business of the day, and, third, there are not enough Members present to have even a token vote. This debate is a non-event. It is not a real or full debate. It is a fig leaf to cover over this nonsense about democracy. I listened with incredulity to Senator Dooley refer to the democracy of the European Union and the watchdog role of the European Parliament. It is a very toothless watchdog. It found out what was being done was illegal. The matter was referred to the European Court of Justice and, in the interim, it continued doing it. How democratic is that? It is not democratic.
The Minister of State’s speech contained the usual ritual kowtowing in the direction of 9/11. I am sick of this. I agree it was a dreadful event. The Minister of State was shocked, as we all were, at the events of 9/11. Was he equally shocked by “shock and awe”, the blitzkrieg on Iraq? Was he shocked by the fact the United States Government seeks to practice torture of a manner not seen since the Gestapo? It wants to legitimate the mass bombing of civilians, the incineration of women and children and the use of cluster bombs in Lebanon by its allies. Do these practices not shock us any longer? There have been at least 100,000 civilian casualties in Iraq. Let us put on record who are the real terrorists. They are those with whom we are again so cravenly collaborating.
I accept it is possible the Americans have all this information already. They have sneaked into our telephone records and our bank accounts, and now we are handing over passenger lists, which will be of no use to them. They have already arrested people on the basis that they spoke Arabic, looked different and had Arabic names. Is this how the information will be used? Shame on the Americans. If they want an end to this awful situation of terror, they should examine its direct causes. There is no point playing around with the symptoms.
This is not democracy; it is a fig leaf. There should be a referendum in every European country with regard to handing over information to a deeply criminal regime, which is what the Bush regime is. I do not dislike America. I am one of America’s best friends in this country because I tell the truth about what is going on there, as a growing number of Americans know. It is a criminal regime. What President Bush has managed to do is make America the most hated nation on the planet, despite it having been one of the most loved.
Mr. Dooley: The process began in 1995 under President Clinton.
Mr. Norris: Undertakings have been given to the European Commission by the US authorities. They are not worth a damn. We have listened to what Condeleezza Rice said about torture. First, the US authorities do not seem to speak the same language. Second, they seem incapable of telling the truth or confronting real moral or ethical issues. I would not hand them any information about anything. It is Big Brother. The sooner we protect ourselves from it, the better.
Apparently, the Attorney General has given advice that there is no problem in this regard. How interesting. Why is it that university candidates in elections are under such stringent restrictions in terms of dealing with a similar database? Are the university elections more of a threat to security?
Mr. Dooley: For the like of the Senator perhaps.
Mr. Norris: That is the level of dishonesty that applies in this regard.
I deplore this motion and the way it was bounced into the House. I deplore the time of the debate, the lack of preparation, the lack of democracy and the fudge that covers over the utter democratic deficit in Europe that has been exposed in everything the Minister of State said. I do not believe the motion is as innocent as suggested. We are lickspittling yet again to a corrupt and criminal administration.
I cannot understand how President Bush has not yet been impeached for breaking state law, federal law, constitutional law, international law and international human rights law. This is the kind of person with whom we are dealing. This is the administration to which we are handing over information about Irish citizens. I oppose this. There is no point calling a vote and I will not do so. However, I want the record of the House to show that at least one voice spoke out passionately against this motion.

Motion on Energy Resources - 11th October 2006

Motion on Energy Resources - 11th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I thank my colleague, Senator O’Toole, for sharing his time with me and allowing me to take part in this debate, which is timely because it reflects not only our energy needs but the impact of energy generation upon the global climate. I am very concerned about this issue. I have a motion on the Order Paper about it because I believe that what we are witnessing is perhaps the beginning of the destruction of the earth as a habitable planet. It is that serious.
In August, I took up an open invitation from the Norwegian Minister for Foreign Affairs to travel to Svalbard and Spitsbergen to see for myself the impact of climate change on marine and mammal life, the ice floes and the glaciers in those regions. What I saw there was very worrying. We also know that in Switzerland, for example, closer to home, the Eiger, one of the most famous mountains, is changing shape because the ice is melting and loosening. Massive rock falls have occurred. The rock face is exposed and is crumbling. Boulders are crashing down on villages. The heart of Europe is already experiencing the effects of climate change.
In Siberia, near Cherski, the permafrost has started to melt, new lakes are appearing, gases are bubbling up from the bottom of these lakes to the surface and they are having a further impact on global warming. Holes are appearing in the roads all around Cherski and buildings are starting to collapse. This is not some kind of science fiction account; this is what is already happening and, as Senator O’Toole said, it may well impact on us.
In the Arctic, the sea ice is decreasing in summer year by year and over the past 30 years, there has been a 15% to 20% decrease in it. I have seen the effect of climate change and one needs to experience it, to go to these places to get a firm hold on the level of the impact and to see what is happening.
We are not spending enough. I heard on the BBC World Service some weeks ago Professor John Holdren of the American Association for the Advancement of Science indicate that our spending rate on a global level in terms of renewing our energy stations and so on is flat whereas even to stand still it ought to be three times what it is currently. They need $12 trillion to rebuild power plants, transmission lines and generating stations. That would have an impact over 30 to 40 years but we are not prepared to do it.
I never thought I would say this but thank God for Arnold Schwarzenegger and the introduction of fuel conservation measures which are being made mandatory throughout the state of California. The situation is now so serious that even the US Congress which, under the Bush Administration, had played ball with the energy and oil industries in particular, recently passed an emergency motion calling for an immediate approach to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. That shows that even within that most conservative group of people there is a recognition that something serious must be done.
With regard to energy, thank God for the people who are protesting in Rossport. Let us consider the way Putin dealt with Shell. It is one of the most disreputable companies on the face of this planet and it is dishonestly buying its way into publications like National Geographic to pretend it is ecologically friendly. It is not. Putin knew how to deal with it. If there is something in it for Shell, it will come back. It is disgraceful that the Irish State should be used by a multinational to crush a local population, so to speak.
I am glad there is use of interconnectors and that this will expand not only through Northern Ireland but also through Europe. That links in with what Senator O’Toole said about a bank of wind farms along the coast.
6 o’clock
I turn now to the question of wind farms and put on record the benefit of them. For every megawatt of Irish wind energy that displaces fossil fuel power production each year, the environmental, economic and social benefits include the following: clean electricity to meet the electricity needs of 650 homes - that is per megawatt; the removal of the need to import 6,450 barrels of oil; the avoidance of 2,700 tonnes of CO2; the avoidance of 49 tonnes of SO2; the avoidance of 5.5 tonnes of NOX; and the avoidance of 175 tonnes of slag and ash for landfill. I know there has been some complaint about the environmental impact of wind farms but these things can be concentrated. In my opinion, they do less damage than people. There are some problems for migrating birds but only a small fraction of these birds will be damaged. They are much more likely to be damaged by a degrading of the environment than by wind farms.
The Government’s website still has out-of-date material on the previous Green Paper which dealt with increasing the percentage of total primary energy requirements to be derived from renewable sources to 3.75% by 2005 from 2% in 2000. Have these targets been achieved and, if not, why are we bleating about further targets when we have not reached the initial ones?

Statements on The UN Committee Report on Children in Ireland - 11th October 2006

UN Committee Report on Children in Ireland: Statements - 11th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I thank my colleague, Senator O’Toole, for sharing his time with me and allowing me to take part in this debate, which is timely because it reflects not only our energy needs but the impact of energy generation upon the global climate. I am very concerned about this issue. I have a motion on the Order Paper about it because I believe that what we are witnessing is perhaps the beginning of the destruction of the earth as a habitable planet. It is that serious.
In August, I took up an open invitation from the Norwegian Minister for Foreign Affairs to travel to Svalbard and Spitsbergen to see for myself the impact of climate change on marine and mammal life, the ice floes and the glaciers in those regions. What I saw there was very worrying. We also know that in Switzerland, for example, closer to home, the Eiger, one of the most famous mountains, is changing shape because the ice is melting and loosening. Massive rock falls have occurred. The rock face is exposed and is crumbling. Boulders are crashing down on villages. The heart of Europe is already experiencing the effects of climate change.
In Siberia, near Cherski, the permafrost has started to melt, new lakes are appearing, gases are bubbling up from the bottom of these lakes to the surface and they are having a further impact on global warming. Holes are appearing in the roads all around Cherski and buildings are starting to collapse. This is not some kind of science fiction account; this is what is already happening and, as Senator O’Toole said, it may well impact on us.
In the Arctic, the sea ice is decreasing in summer year by year and over the past 30 years, there has been a 15% to 20% decrease in it. I have seen the effect of climate change and one needs to experience it, to go to these places to get a firm hold on the level of the impact and to see what is happening.
We are not spending enough. I heard on the BBC World Service some weeks ago Professor John Holdren of the American Association for the Advancement of Science indicate that our spending rate on a global level in terms of renewing our energy stations and so on is flat whereas even to stand still it ought to be three times what it is currently. They need $12 trillion to rebuild power plants, transmission lines and generating stations. That would have an impact over 30 to 40 years but we are not prepared to do it.
I never thought I would say this but thank God for Arnold Schwarzenegger and the introduction of fuel conservation measures which are being made mandatory throughout the state of California. The situation is now so serious that even the US Congress which, under the Bush Administration, had played ball with the energy and oil industries in particular, recently passed an emergency motion calling for an immediate approach to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. That shows that even within that most conservative group of people there is a recognition that something serious must be done.
With regard to energy, thank God for the people who are protesting in Rossport. Let us consider the way Putin dealt with Shell. It is one of the most disreputable companies on the face of this planet and it is dishonestly buying its way into publications like National Geographic to pretend it is ecologically friendly. It is not. Putin knew how to deal with it. If there is something in it for Shell, it will come back. It is disgraceful that the Irish State should be used by a multinational to crush a local population, so to speak.
I am glad there is use of interconnectors and that this will expand not only through Northern Ireland but also through Europe. That links in with what Senator O’Toole said about a bank of wind farms along the coast.
6 o’clock
I turn now to the question of wind farms and put on record the benefit of them. For every megawatt of Irish wind energy that displaces fossil fuel power production each year, the environmental, economic and social benefits include the following: clean electricity to meet the electricity needs of 650 homes - that is per megawatt; the removal of the need to import 6,450 barrels of oil; the avoidance of 2,700 tonnes of CO2; the avoidance of 49 tonnes of SO2; the avoidance of 5.5 tonnes of NOX; and the avoidance of 175 tonnes of slag and ash for landfill. I know there has been some complaint about the environmental impact of wind farms but these things can be concentrated. In my opinion, they do less damage than people. There are some problems for migrating birds but only a small fraction of these birds will be damaged. They are much more likely to be damaged by a degrading of the environment than by wind farms.
The Government’s website still has out-of-date material on the previous Green Paper which dealt with increasing the percentage of total primary energy requirements to be derived from renewable sources to 3.75% by 2005 from 2% in 2000. Have these targets been achieved and, if not, why are we bleating about further targets when we have not reached the initial ones?

Order of Business - 11th October 2006

Order of Business - 11th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I join with colleagues who have called for a debate on Aer Lingus. It seems quite extraordinary that a Government that promised us this would lead to competition has led us down an alley into which we will have a virtual monopoly. In addition, I understand that there are substantial funds - possibly in excess of €1 billion in cash - in Aer Lingus. Therefore, it is a really sweet deal for Mr. O’Leary as it is almost self-financing. Some of the advisers are people who also advised on the Eircom flotation. What concerns me in particular is that Mr. O’Leary is a clever man. One may not like what he does but he is certainly very shrewd. He is clearly setting out to alienate the workforce as much as he can. He is certainly not reaching out to them. In the weekend newspapers, he said he was going to slash jobs. He did not say “cutting”; he said “slashing”. That is good management relations.
An Cathaoirleach: We cannot have a discussion on the chief executive of Ryanair now.
Mr. Norris: I support the call for a debate on that matter. I am concerned about the question of SSIAs. I agree with my colleagues, Senator Brian Hayes and Senator O’Toole, who have called for the Minister for Education and Science to attend the House. It would be a real disincentive if SSIAs were to be taken into consideration in terms of educational grants. It is a kind of Indian giving and it is not on. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House will remember senior Ministers giving assurances that there would not be this kind of chicanery and trickery. They said they would not try to claw back tax but if they are now trying to do so, we should know.
I also wish to seek a debate either on the situation in Darfur or, in the context of what Senator Dardis said, on the role of the United Nations peacekeeping missions. We have a disastrous situation in Darfur where, in the past week or two, 400 women have been raped. Villages are being bombed by Government forces in collaboration with the Janjaweed. Rape is being used as an instrument of policy. In addition, the African Union mission may be withdrawn, thus leaving a complete vacuum. These people are being left unprotected. This is a Rwandan-scale genocide waiting to happen. On this occasion, we cannot say we are unaware of it. We know only too well what is occurring.
A final point must be taken into account. How disgraceful the attitudes of various nations are that stepped up to the mark, in front of the television cameras, and pledged money for such situations, yet then welshed on those pledges. That is what has been happening in Darfur where we know people are starving. European and American politicians said they would give so many millions but they failed to deliver. They should be called to account.

Order of Business - 4th October 2006

Order of Business – 4th October 2006

Mr. Norris: Not unnaturally I agree with part of what Senator Lydon has said. Although I have been long a supporter of women's rights, I do not see the European Court of Justice ruling as a women's rights issue. What we have heard in the Chamber this morning is political correctness gone utterly mad. The debate should be on length of service and not on an aspect of discrimination. If one accepts length of service as a criteria, then it is ludicrous to reward people for not being at work. I never heard anything so bizarre in my life.

Ms Terry: What about equal pay for an equal job?

Mr. Norris: Yes and if one accepts equal pay for equal work, then the court is right. Of course women must take time off work to have children. What is also being considered is taking a year off for child-rearing.

Why should employers be required to pay on the basis of experience that is simply not there?

Dr. Mansergh: They should be required to do so because it is socially desirable.

Mr. Norris: I always enjoy Senator Mansergh's contributions but I ask him - a historian who comes from a stable of historians - whether he will tell the House when the last Exchequer reports for the Dark Ages were issued?

Ms White: The views Senator Norris is expressing are Victorian.

Ms O'Rourke: I assume Senator Norris's reference to "Dark Ages" is metaphorical.

Mr. Norris: Under the Cathaoirleach's severe rulings, we cannot have a debate on this matter now. As somebody who has supported women's rights all my political life, I will be happy to bring some plain common sense to it when it takes place. When one gets into political correctness, one is on a sticky wicket.
I support my colleague Senator Quinn, who raised the important issue of how urban sprawl affects this city. I will pass a bouquet to the other side, however, by pointing to the conference, A New Heart for Dublin, organised by Senator Morrissey, a Government Member, for 20 October in Dublin Castle. I hope Members who are concerned about this issue will attend and I congratulate Senator Morrissey on this initiative.
I applaud the Taoiseach for the extraordinary neatness with which he arranged the money in his sock. If it were me, I would probably have ended up with £47,579.14 and a halfpenny. The Taoiseach, however, managed to achieve the target of €50,000 exactly and put it in the sock. This was well done. It is the type of financial credibility that has made this country great.

Mr. Leyden: He should have bought a house in Cyprus.

Mr. Norris: There is a serious issue here, although it is a slightly grey area. I laugh when I hear the Tánaiste, Deputy McDowell, bellyaching about leaks. Is he serious?

An Cathaoirleach: Senator Norris should speak on matters relevant to the Order of Business.

Mr. Norris: This matter raises a serious issue which the House should debate. This is the sinister attempts that have been made to undermine politicians. I condemn absolutely the attempt to impugn the reputation of the Taoiseach by offering forged documents to the tribunal.

Mr. B. Hayes: Hear, hear.

Mr. Norris: This was a most disgraceful and criminal act. I hope it will be thoroughly investigated and those responsible brought to account.
My final point relates to Babcock and Brown, Eircom and so on. Consumers are getting a lousy deal. We must all do something about this, including Fianna Fáil, the Republican Party, which was effective on ground rent and in getting rid of landlordism. Why are we still paying rental money to Australia, France and pension funds all over the world for lines put in by this State, paid for by us and itemised in every telephone bill we receive? We must eradicate landlordism in the telecommunications business by putting an end to line rent.

Order of Business - 3rd October 2006

Order of Business – 3rd October 2006

Mr. Norris: It is ironic that the House's consideration of the Road Traffic and Transport Bill 2006 coincides, as I understand it, with a meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport. It is a pity that Members are disadvantaged by not being able to be part of the deliberations of that committee. Meetings of that committee are often scheduled to coincide with the Order of Business in this House. There should be a rebellion - Senators should make it clear that they will not attend unless this matter is examined and rectified.
I am grateful to Senator Brian Hayes for speaking about the status of No. 28, the Civil Partnership Bill 2004. I had intended to raise the matter but it is much better that it has been raised by the leader of the principal Opposition group in the House. People on the other side of the House agree that this matter, which has been long-fingered, needs to be addressed. I hope the Leader of the House will be able to make time available for a full debate on the issue. As a result of the various technicalities which arose when we had a row about the Bill, just five minutes are remaining in the Second Stage debate on it. Perhaps some machinery will be made available to the House to allow for a full debate, particularly in light of the ongoing High Court case and the fact that I have amended the Bill to take account of the various points which have been made. More than five minutes would be needed to address the matter adequately.
I would like Senators to be able to debate the situation in the Middle East. After the business of the House ended for the summer, an appalling situation developed in Lebanon - there was a massive abuse of human rights. The international community held back from demanding an end to the assault on Lebanon. In that context, we should review the policy of allowing CIA flights to pass through Shannon Airport, given that Mr. Bush has admitted that torture has been widely used - the CIA has been widely involved - and acknowledged the existence of secret detention and torture camps. If the President of the United States can acknowledge that, I fail to understand why my colleagues on the Government backbenches who have a close identification with Shannon Airport are unable to face up to it. I would also like to highlight the report from the intelligence chiefs, which indicates that torture has increased since the Americans attacked Iraq, that there has been an increase in terrorism globally and that the Anglo-American attitude and policy has actually strengthened al-Qaeda. In a week when the US Congress, to its eternal shame, has passed a Bill that purports to legitimise torture, it is important for those of us in the West who are proud to belong to "old Europe" to put on the record our values, as distinct from those values which are tragically becoming American under a Presidency which has sadly managed to make America the most hated nation on the globe.