Senator O'Brien asked a range of specific questions. In response to his first question on pyrite legislation, I agree it is welcome it is being introduced in the Seanad. I am delighted and we should all put pressure on Ministers to do this as much as possible. It is very good to have comprehensive debate here before the legislation goes to the Dáil. I am told it will be before Christmas but we do not have a specific date yet. The social welfare Bill will be in our pigeonholes tomorrow morning. The conduct of business in the Dáil is a matter for that House but the Leader, Senator Cummins, has given an undertaking the Bill will not be guillotined when it comes to this House and I am sure he will hold to it as we all wish him to.

I understand the House will begin to consider the Bill on 5 November. We will have all of next week in addition to the remainder of this week to prepare for the debate. I know it will be an honest and robust debate, but given it must be so it is important we remember the facts of the budget. We have had a huge amount of spin and hyperbole from the other side which is hard to take. To respond in a factual and objective manner, basic social welfare rates were preserved, there was no increase in income tax and, it is fair to say, for the vast majority, particularly hard-pressed families and the squeezed middle, as it is often referred to, the budget has not had an adverse financial impact and this is a fair point.

Mortgage interest supplement was abolished.

Health insurance.

I ask the Opposition, which speaks of a fiction of figures prepared, to be aware of some of the factual and objective findings. This week I saw the findings of a study by the OECD on the progressive nature of the Irish tax system in which 19% of tax is paid by the top 1% of earners, 41% of tax is paid-----

We made those changes to the taxation policy.

-----by the top 5% and-----

The Government made no contribution to this.

-----77% is paid by the top 23%. The Irish tax system according to the OECD-----

Does it come from this document?

Senator Bacik is speaking about our budgets.

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

These are findings of the OECD. Fianna Fáil may not like these facts.

The Government had nothing to do with it. It was Fianna Fáil budgets.

It is coming from the OECD. It may be reproduced in some documents but the OECD study has made this finding.

I am speaking about our budgets.

Senator O'Brien also asked about the HSE and the figure for cuts in health. As he is aware, the health service savings target for next year is €666 million, which is set out in the 2014 Estimates. The HSE must prepare and adopt its 2014 national service plan for submission to the Minister for Health within 21 days of the publication by the Government of the Estimates for supplied services for 2014, which is Tuesday, 5 November.

The national service plan must indicate the type and volume of health and personal social services that the HSE will provide during 2014. Clearly, what is involved here is much more difficult than preparing an ordinary business plan. Some rather ridiculous comparisons were made by those on the opposite side of the House in this regard.

Imagine being able to manage the Department's finances. Is that not ridiculous?

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

Imagine being able to stick to a budget.

Let us examine some objective facts. The population of the State has increased by 8%, the proportion of persons aged 65 and over is increasing by over 20%, there has been a €3.3 billion reduction in the HSE's budget since 2008 and a cut of 10%, or 11,000, in the number of health service staff and a 3%-----

A litany of broken promises. There have now been deficits in two successive budgets in the area of health. The Minister is a great man. He is brilliant.

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

I suggest that Senator MacSharry listen to the figures I am providing.

The Minister should be given an award.

Senator Bacik is trying to respond to questions that were raised earlier.

When I was over there I would not listen to rubbish of this nature and I am not prepared to do so now.

The Senator is not over here anymore.

The Senator did not even listen to himself back then.

I was-----

Senator MacSharry may not want to listen-----

The sooner the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Howlin, stops leaking information to the media and stands up to his ministerial colleague the better.

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

Senator MacSharry may not wish to listen to the facts but Senator Darragh O'Brien asked me some questions and I am trying to provide a fair response. I suggest that Senator MacSharry consider the figures. This year alone there has been a 3% increase-----

Is the Senator referring to the €666 million or the €1 billion?

The Senator should attend the meetings of the Joint Committee on Health and Children if he wants to obtain the relevant information.

On a point of order, it is my understanding that the House passed a motion to the effect that the Order of Business should take precedence over attendance at certain committees. I call on Senator Colm Burke to withdraw his last statement. The Senator might have taken time to correct the record in respect of the factually incorrect press releases issued by Deputy Harris in respect of my attendance at the meetings of the Joint Committee on Health and Children.

That is not a point of order.

This is a very important issue.

The Senator already made his contribution to the Order of Business.

I was in attendance at last Thursday's meeting of the joint committee.

The Senator is completely out of order.

No. With respect, the person who is out of order is seated on the opposite side. That individual is being highly mischievous in making-----

Senator MacSharry is completely out of order.

-----incorrect statements about other people's attendance.

I ask the Senator to resume his seat. The Deputy Leader is replying to the Order of Business.

Are we going to invite Senator Colm Burke to withdraw his ridiculous assertion about a meeting at which I was present? The Senator should check the record.

Senator MacSharry should resume his seat.

I did not-----

Senator Colm Burke was speaking in general terms.

Check the record.

I do not believe Senator MacSharry asked any questions at the meeting in question.

Senator Bacik to proceed, without interruption.

Without wishing to speak for Senator Colm Burke, I believe he was suggesting that persons who wished to put questions to the Minister for Health might have posed them during the three-hour meeting of the joint committee which took place last week.

I am trying to provide answers to the questions posed earlier. Among the facts provided by the Minister for Health to the Lower House is that which indicates that the HSE is being obliged to cope with a demographic challenge relating to the increase in population. The latter is, of course, additional to the challenged posed by our economic situation. As the Minister, Deputy Reilly has pointed out, in this year alone there has been a 3% increase in admissions to accident and emergency departments. I am of the view that everyone will accept that circumstances of this nature are extremely difficult to budget for. The Minister is presiding over an unprecedented reform programme. Perhaps Senator MacSharry might want to listen when I inform him that last week I referred to changes to hospital governance in anticipation of the roll-out of universal health insurance and the end of the inequitable two-tier health system. The Government is committed to this and the Minister and his Department have been working on it. Many colleagues are not aware of that fact. On previous occasions I asked the Leader to allow the House to debate the progress that has been made towards the roll-out of universal health insurance.

What progress?

Like many others, I have welcomed the extension of free primary care to children under six.

When will that be introduced?

I do not know but I can check the position for the Senator.

Will it be paid for out of the €2 billion or the €666 million?

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

I did not hear the matter being mentioned at last week's meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children. I did not hear an answer being provided at that forum by either Tony O'Brien or the Minister. They did not have a clue from where the figures came.

It is interesting-----

Senator Bacik, without interruption.

They did not have a clue.

-----that those on the other side spent a great deal of time asking questions about health and that they now do not want to listen to the answers I am trying to provide.

The Deputy Leader clearly does not have them.

I have given a very clear answer-----

Senator MacSharry should allow Senator Bacik to conclude.

What I am saying is hardly provocative. Surely my questions deserve a response of a factual nature.

If Senator MacSharry does not stop interrupting, I will put the question on the Order of Business.

We should not be obliged to listen to this rubbish on a daily basis. All hail the Minister for Health who does not know from where the figures come. Hello? Is it any wonder we are asking questions.

Senator MacSharry should show Senator Bacik, who is trying to respond to questions put to her, some respect.

The Deputy Leader should show respect to the people outside the gate who are asking whether the cutbacks in health will amount to €666 million, €1 billion or €2 billion, and how the figure of €113 million was devised.

I am asking the Senator, please, to respect the House.

One of the strengths on which we in this House have always prided ourselves is that we conduct debate in a respectful and courteous manner. In fairness to Senator Darragh O'Brien, he has listened courteously as I tried to respond fairly to the questions he asked. I cannot say the same for all of his colleagues. I ask Members to treat whoever is standing in the Leader's position with the respect that position should be accorded and in line with the rules of the House.

The Deputy Leader was fantastic at following those rules in her own day.

Senator MacSharry, please.

Senator Clune referred to the childhood obesity campaign and called for a debate on the issue. Such a debate certainly would be worth having. Senator Catherine Noone raised the same issue and suggested it might be a matter for the Seanad Public Consultation Committee. I agree that it would be a useful follow-up to the previous debate and the report we produced on lifestyle and cancer issues.

Senator Barrett made several timely points regarding opinion polls and how wrong they can be in the context of referendum campaigns. There is clearly a good deal of work to be done in terms of determining what changed in the week between the final opinion polls and the holding of the referendum to abolish the Seanad, or whether the opinion polls themselves were flawed. This House has a proud tradition of spotting flaws in legislation on opinion polls and stopping that legislation from going forward. On the issue of spoiling ballot papers, while people writing in newspapers can advocate anything they like, I agree with the Senator regarding the importance of educating people as to what can count as a spoilt vote and that anything written on a ballot paper may jeopardise the counting of that paper.

I join Senator Moloney in welcoming the ruling on the referendum on children's rights. The Senator also asked that the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, be invited to the House for a debate on water charges. The Minister will be here this afternoon for statements on The One Percent Difference campaign, but we can certainly seek to arrange a debate on water charges in the future.

Senator Leyden proposed an amendment to the Order of Business that No. 13 be taken before No. 1. I am happy to agree to that proposal.

I thank the Deputy Leader.

I agree with the Senator's comments in support of efforts by the Garda Síochána to combat child trafficking.

Senator Jim D'Arcy called for a debate on the one-parent family credit changes and referred to a potential unintended consequence thereof in the form of discrimination against a particular group. I agree with the Senator's comments, particularly in the context of the recent debate at the Constitutional Convention on the need to re-calibrate the role of women to take account of the increasingly strong caring roles being taken by fathers. I absolutely agree that anything which impedes that progress would be troubling. A debate on these issues is timely in a context where couples, even after separation, are dividing up child care responsibility in a very different way from what was common in the past.

I have already responded to Senator MacSharry. Senator Noone referred to the childhood obesity initiative, which I covered.

Senator O'Donnell raised the sale of the national lottery licence. That sale, and the money it generated, has had a strong impact on the budget. The measures the Senator referred to, including progress on the development of the national children's hospital and initiatives such as the City of Culture, are job creation initiatives and it is very important that funding be provided for them. We have had several opportunities to debate the awarding of the national lottery licence with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, but we certainly can seek another debate.

Senator O'Donnell also spoke of the failure to bring to book anybody who played a part in bringing about the economic crisis. That is an ongoing issue which has been raised by many speakers in this House.

I referred in particular to the construction industry.

Senator Conway made the same point more generally with reference to bankers. As we know, trials are pending against certain individuals involved in the former Anglo Irish Bank, but I certainly agree that the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement must be facilitated with any resources necessary to ensure prosecutions are brought for the type of conduct that led to Priory Hall and so on. It should be noted, however, that the investigation and prosecution authorities of the State are independent of the Legislature. Senator Conway called for the Minister for Justice and Equality to give us an update on investigations, but I am not sure whether that would be appropriate. It would be appropriate, however, for the Minister to outline the State's machinery of enforcement and the resources provided for that purpose.

Senator Thomas Byrne referred to the Protected Disclosures Bill. The amended schedule of business for this week was circulated last Sunday, which gave adequate notice to Members. I presume the Bill simply was not ready to go to Report Stage, but I am sure we will have it in due course.

The Senator also raised issues relating to the budget. We will have plenty of time to discuss those issues in the context of the debate on the social welfare Bill and so on. We have already had some debate on the budget. There have been plenty of measures in this and previous budgets which have impacted on the higher paid, and rightly so. We are seeing some signs of confidence returning, with two years of growth and the creation of 34,000 jobs in the past 12 months.

There is no apology for focusing on job creation in this as in previous budgets.

Senator Colm Burke pointed out that the Minister for Health had attended a meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children for three and half hours last week. He also referred to the health budget allocated to non-HSE bodies. That topic is worthy of debate.

Senator Martin Conway referred to the lack of accountability. We might have the Minister for Justice and Equality in the Chamber to speak about enforcement mechanisms.

With regard to the comments of Senator Diarmuid Wilson, I can check the commencement dates for the Further Education and Training Bill, but any delay in the commencement of the Bill should not delay the introduction of training places for young people. Funding has been put aside in the budget and there is a commitment to the youth guarantee to ensure there are sufficient further education and training places available.

Senator Susan O'Keeffe referred to the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the horsemeat scandal. The Minister will attend tomorrow for a wide-ranging debate and statements on the Common Agriculture Policy. The alarming findings of the horsemeat scandal can be put to him.

Senator Michael Mullins referred to the need for a debate on the situation in Syria. We will ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to attend the House for a debate on that topic which a number of Senators have requested. The conditions in which children and civilians are living are appalling. I understand the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade will attend the Chamber on Thursday morning for some of the debate on the EU Scrutiny and Transparency in Government Bill.

An amendment was proposed by Senator Marc MacSharry and seconded by Senator Thomas Byrne, but I cannot agree to it.