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

Constitutional property rights

Summary

Senator Barrett questions why rent may receive constitutional protection when wages, welfare and other income do not.

I thank the Leader for arranging the debates on unemployment next week. I also thank colleagues for supporting Senator Feargal Quinn's Bill yesterday. The advice communicated from the Attorney General is strange. It suggests one form of property right - namely, rent - enjoys constitutional protection, while all other forms of income do not. All other forms of income have declined in this recession. Indeed, the Constitutional Convention debated a wider definition of property rights only last weekend. Social welfare payments, wages and other forms of income are not protected by the Constitution. We need to have a wider definition of property rights rather than the one that was used to back up the Government's stance yesterday.

I also call for a debate on Northern Ireland. This is a critical time and the Northern Ireland Assembly may collapse. It is ominous that in February 1914, Edward Carson, speaking in the House of Commons, stated:

I say this to my Nationalist fellow-countrymen [...], you have never tried to win over Ulster. You have never tried to understand her position.

At that stage, we were on the brink of Home Rule for the whole of Ireland. Let us not make the same mistake again. We must have a debate on Northern Ireland. I further suggest we ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Ms Theresa Villiers, if she would be willing to address the House.

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

That is a splendid idea.

Comment on this