We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Seanad
‹ Order of Business

Seanad sitting schedule

Summary

Senator Kelly criticises the Seanad’s uneven sitting schedule and calls for Government to organise legislative business more consistently following the referendum’s retention of the House.

It is more than regrettable and lamentable that we are sitting for just one and a half days this week. This House seems to have form in this regard. It is totally unacceptable that we sometimes work for just one and a half days earlier in the session, only to have four-day sittings and late-night sittings with rushed and guillotined legislation in Christmas week and in Easter week. Along with Senators Whelan and Landy, I openly canvassed against the grain for the retention of this House.

Comment on this
David P.B. Norris Senator David Norris Independent

Well done.

Comment on this

We had the support of many others.

Comment on this

The three musketeers.

Comment on this

Thankfully, the people bought into this. We promised change in this House. We said we would do business in a different way. When the people voted to keep this House, it was incumbent on the Government to structure business in an orderly way and to make sure legislation comes through this House in an orderly fashion. We should not be sitting for one and a half days one week and for four days the following week.

I agree with Senator Cullinane, who mentioned six urgent matters we could discuss in this House on Thursday. I will mention three others. Reference has been made to the neknomination phenomenon, which is afflicting the young people of today. We have already lost two people. This is winding down, but my information suggests that something structurally worse than "neknomination" is coming through. It is important that we deal with these issues in this House before that happens.

We should also be discussing the plight of mortgage holders who are insolvent. We have insolvency legislation that applies only to those who can afford to buy into it. This is a serious matter for thousands of people in this country.

I would like to conclude by calling on the Leader to organise a debate on the proposed bylaws that will increase the charges that have to be paid in respect of boats moored on our canals and waterways. The deadline for submissions to the Minister on this issue was yesterday. He will now decide how to implement the bylaws. At present, the charge for mooring a boat is €126 a year. The proposed new charge is €3,500 a year, which is absolutely outrageous. Between 300 and 400 people are mooring on our canals and waterways. Most of them are retired couples from England who are receiving small English pensions. This proposal will drive them off the water and back to England. They are contributing hugely to local economies throughout this country. I ask the Leader to arrange a debate with the Minister on this matter.

I do not want an Adjournment debate. There are too many people in the House who would agree with me on this. There needs to be a broad debate with the Minister. As was already said, I compliment Joe O'Connor, the president of USI, for his intervention on the neknomination issue.

Comment on this