On eight separate occasions in this House I have called for a debate on the issue of poverty. As Senator Katherine Zappone says, we should have a constructive debate on the causes of poverty in the State. I made those calls as someone who sees when doing constituency work the increasing numbers of people living in poverty. There have been two reports, a study and an analysis of the CSO figures from last year, which show conclusively that poverty levels are increasing. The CSO figures show 25% of the population live in deprivation, an increase of 50% in two years, proving the last two budgets were the most unequal of the last six. A third of children live in deprivation. Twice as many people - 15% - who are at work are in deprivation compared with 2009. The vulnerable, the unemployed and the low paid are the people who have been hit the hardest. We also had the Europe-wide study mentioned by Senator Norris of the five states in the European Union most affected by austerity and it showed once again the deep impact austerity measures are having on families. It shows high levels of unemployment across Europe and dangerously high levels of youth unemployment. Children are at greater risk of poverty and social exclusion. This report paints a picture of Europe in a real and deep crisis.

While all of that is happening and while more tax increases that disproportionately affect lower income families are being introduced, we will discuss today the turning of €32 billion of toxic banking debt into sovereign debt.

The Senator must change his tune. The promissory notes are gone.

The people in question live in poverty which I know Senators on the Government side might find uncomfortable. I will not be changing my tune because it remains exactly the same.

The Senator is like a broken record.

He never changes his tune.

I am sure people who are living in poverty and suffering will find some of the comments by Senators on the other side highly offensive given that they will have to repay debts which are not theirs.

The Senator is over time.

What Senator Maurice Cummins and his colleagues in the Labour Party simply cannot comprehend is that not one single cent of the €32 billion belongs to the people. It was not spent nor borrowed by them.

The Senator should resume his seat. He must respect the Chair.

Let him at it.

I am making the point that I will not be lectured by Senators on the other side. I will not change my tune and I will continue to stand up for those who are living in poverty and will continue to live in poverty unless we make different policy decisions.

The next time, I will not ask the Senator to respect the Chair but to remove himself from the House.

I suppose, with his history, he has no respect for life and no respect for-----

We know what Senator's party did for the country.

Did Senator Cáit Keane say Senator David Cullinane had no respect for life? Was that what was said? I did not hear the comment, but if she made the remark I thought I heard, that Senator David Cullinane has no respect for life, I ask respectfully that it be withdrawn. The Cathaoirleach should ask her to withdraw it.

I did not hear any remark.

With so much going on at once, I have almost forgotten what I was about to say. I would welcome a debate on the issue of poverty. People who are suffering poverty and cannot afford basic necessities do not have the luxuries available to the leader of Sinn Féin who can travel first class to America and have his medical treatment paid for by a multimillionaire.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

I ask for a debate on the issue of poverty. Unlike the rest of the population, Deputy Gerry Adams can call on his friends in Manhattan to pay for his hospital treatment and fly first class to New York and back, which we would all love to do but do not have such a luxury available to us. It is important to have a debate on the issue of poverty in order that those who talk about it also practise it.

Hypocrisy is good.

Does Senator Jimmy Harte have a question for the Leader?

On the property tax, one of the parties opposite imposed a property tax, while the other agreed to the introduction of such a tax in its agreement with the troika. Both parties now oppose the property tax for purely populist reasons.

The Leader of the Opposition in the Dáil has stated in the other House and in interviews that he feels a certain amount of guilt about the scandal of the Magdalen laundries. One does not state in court that one feels a certain amount of guilt because one is either guilty or not guilty. The efforts by the Fianna Fáil Party to argue it is only half-guilty are a little like saying "I am slightly pregnant."

Goodness me, is the Senator really pregnant?

Does Senator Jimmy Harte have a question for the Leader?

Yes, I ask him to arrange a debate on the issue of poverty.

The most pressing issue of the day is the revelation that one quarter of the population are living a life of deprivation in which they are deprived of basic necessities. I do not see any urgency on the part of the Government to tackle this issue. When 56% of single parent households are described as living in deprivation, we can only imagine what will be the consequences for future generations. As is the case with the mortgage crisis, we have not seen any Government action on the issue of poverty, other than announcements that it is establishing a commission or inquiry or appointing individuals to certain roles. We have activity but no action.

Some Senators opposite seem to have cited the leaked report into the death of Savita Halappanavar. Have they received the report or spoken to anyone about it? The report and the tragic case in Galway are being utilised by some people who have the best of intentions and others who want to have abortion on demand. The latter are using the tragedy to fulfil their own-----

On a point of order, I utterly refute and reject the sly innuendo in the Senator's comments.

Does Senator Mark Daly have a question for the Leader?

I did not refer to Senator Ivana Bacik.

I know.

I recall being scolded by her for interrupting during the Order of Business.

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?