I am delighted time has been set aside for statements of appreciation on the life and work of Seamus Heaney who was hugely respected and loved nationally and internationally.

I, too, commend Senator Quinn for the introduction last night of the Bill on upward only rent reviews, which is a hugely important issue. While I did not speak at length on it, I did contribute to the debate.

The Senator did well.

She voted against it.

The Senator voted the wrong way.

Senator Ivana Bacik to continue, without interruptions, please.

As acknowledged by Senator Darragh O'Brien, this is not the first Government to face difficulties in tackling this issue. I acknowledged in my contribution last night that the previous Government had tried to tackle it. There is an underlying problem, which should be debated in the Seanad, namely, the elevated protection of property rights in the Constitution. I would welcome an honest debate on the issue in the Seanad, including on the hampering affect this has had on Government policy not only in the area of commercial or retail leases but in the area of levies on development land and land being sat upon by speculators and not used. We have had reports in the past on actions that should be taken by the Government to penalise those who own land and are allowing it to remain idle. Often action is not taken because of a fear of the constitutionality of doing so owing to the courts protection of property rights, which is not an ungrounded fear. As I pointed out last night, there have been significant examples of progressive legislation that has been struck down by the Supreme Court in the past because of the property rights article. I would welcome a broader debate on the issue in this House.

I welcome the positive news yesterday in terms of the reduction in the live register figures and in regard to tax returns. As I have previously stated, it appears that the adjustments to be made in the forthcoming budget will be of the order of less than €3.1 billion, which is welcome. The drop by more than 20,000 in the live register figures released yesterday by the Central Statistics Office was welcomed by the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, who pointed out that every 10,000 drop in the live register saves approximately €95 million, which has a hugely significant impact on the public finances. The positive move is an indication that the Government's Action Plan for Jobs and Pathways to Work programme being led by the Department of Social Protection are having a positive affect. The Minister, Deputy Burton, has spoken eloquently in this House and elsewhere of the need for social protection to be a springboard, as well as a safety net. She is a genuinely reforming Minister in this area. I commend her on her work. I hope we will have further debates in this House with her on the Pathways to Work initiative and measures to tackle unemployment, which is the most pressing issue we face in this country today.

Last night's debate was very valuable not because some members of the Labour Party went missing or spoke in favour of but against the Bill but because of the serious issues raised therein. Property bubbles are threatening to destroy many economies worldwide. We need a system that favours entrepreneurship and enterprise over finance and banking. Many countries have been doing the exact opposite. This is Wall Street versus Main Street. How we deal with property rights is subtle. It is up to us as legislators to go review all of that. Previously, people in the city had the right to burn whatever coal they wanted to burn. This was changed. Changes were also made in regard to tobacco smoking, which damages people's health. The taxi licence value of €130,000 was also changed. Recently, a farmer whose family have owned an historic house near Carton House in north Kildare for hundreds of years was required to move because IDA Ireland wanted the land for expansion. Property rights are subtle. This is what should be emphasised in our future debates on this issue.

I take it the Leader has had no communications from the Minister of State, Deputy Cannon, which means his allegation that he was bribed by a Member of this House is now null and void. The Minister of State is in Istanbul and is not using his telephone. When we said the prayer earlier we did so with more fervour than ever given today is, if the Taoiseach gets his way, the day before this House is moved to death row. It is appalling. I am a member of the North-South Interparliamentary Association, which cannot meet tomorrow because it would mean we would be meeting with Northerners on the same day as a partitionist Taoiseach was abolishing the two all-Ireland constituencies in this Oireachtas, TCD and NUI, which is a shameful way to treat our Northern brethren. I will ask Mr. Haass to take up the matter with the Taoiseach.

I call on the decent people in the Fine Gael Party, in that parliamentary tradition from Griffith to Garret FitzGerald, to vote "No" tomorrow. I hope that the Fianna Fáil votes loaned to Fine Gael during the last election will be returned, that the Labour Party element of Conor Cruise O'Brien will assert itself and that Sinn Féin will not vote with the partitionist Taoiseach tomorrow. We need this House. The cowards mark the patriots fate who hangs his head in shame. We have been mocked from every lamp post in the country. We cannot have "Alas, that might should conquer right" on this issue.

Following on from yesterday's debate and Senator Darragh O'Brien's contribution this morning, I call on the Leader to raise the following matter with the Minister for Finance. Yesterday, I raised the issue of it not being possible to apply legislation retrospectively, which is an issue in the context of the upward only rent reviews legislation which we debated last night. I would like to suggest a solution to the problem, namely, that the Government introduce a tax payable on the difference between the market rent and what is being charged by the landlord. This would not make the legislation retrospective. It is a proposal that could be considered in the context of the forthcoming budget and would not require amendment of current law in this area. It is a different way of looking at the issue. I ask that the Leader bring this matter to the attention of the Minister for Finance.