I wish to extend our deepest sympathy to the bereaved families in Toronto, and all Canadian people, on yesterday's incident which took so many lives.

I wish to discuss the hooded men briefing held in the AV room in Leinster House. I thank my colleague, Senator Niall Ó Donghaile, and Mr. Jim Gibney for organising it. I also thank the Tánaiste, Deputy Coveney, for agreeing to meet them this afternoon. I hope the meeting will be productive. Their main request and that of Sinn Féin is that the Government appeal the judgment of the European Court of Justice, ECJ, on this case. At the briefing we heard from Francie McGuigan and Liam Shannon in particular, two of the 14 men singled out for special treatment and torture during internment in 1971. Those not familiar with the events should look up what happened in the nine days for which these men were taken away and deemed missing, the techniques that were used and the sheer and utter brutality of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, RUC, with the backup of the British Army, in a purpose-built torture centre in Ballykelly. The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in 1978 did not take into account all the relevant details. These men want to know who was responsible for what happened to them and why it was done. The main issue is the need for the Government to appeal the judgment of the ECJ. Uniquely, those who carried out the torture asked the British Government for immunity before the men were tortured. I was not aware of that until we heard the first hand experiences of the hooded men and from Darragh Mackin of their legal team.

They described how they were taken in a helicopter and how they were hung backwards out of the helicopter. They were five foot from the ground but they had no idea how high in the air they were. They described how they were subject to white noise and how, for seven days, they were not allowed to use the toilet. It was deemed as degrading and inhumane treatment. We are also aware that it was torture.

It was torture. The Senator is right.

I thank Senator Norris. The Belfast High Court and the British Supreme Court acknowledged that if it was done now it would be deemed as torture. I am asking for this to be done not just because of these men, but because of the international consequences of that kind of treatment not being deemed as torture. We need to take that into account. There was a British Minister in attendance at the time these torture techniques were being shown to be approved. It is for all of those reasons.

I commend the men and their legal team for coming down today. I commend the Tánaiste for meeting with them and I hope there will be a positive outcome. I ask the Leader, and the parties and Independent Senators who operate in the Seanad, to help these men to get this appeal in place. It is time limited and it needs to be done before the 15 May.

I am sorry to have missed them myself. I had prior engagement. I sent my apology.

I refer to my motion that Seanad Éireann requests the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, CPP, to delete Standing Order No. 41 that prevents the Seanad from accepting amendments that create a charge on the Exchequer. I have received a note from the Cathaoirleach's office, on the advice of the Clerk. It states:

I regret [...] to have to rule that your motion in relation to the removal of Standing Order 41 is out of order on the basis that Standing Order 98 tasks the Committee on Procedure and Privileges with recommending "any additions or amendments to Standing Orders that may be deemed necessary". As you know, the Committee has already been asked by you to consider a proposal in respect of Standing Order 41.

This is the most farcical ruling I have ever come across in a long career in Seanad Éireann. It is utterly inane. The very reason I sent the request to the CPP is because it is the committee that has the function of doing this. For what other reason would one send the request? It is linguistically, grammatically and legally utter nonsense to make such a ruling. I have consulted very widely legally on this. A senior counsel, a former Attorney General of this State, and the legal officer of the Labour Party have all agreed that this is utter, classic nonsense. It is wrong. It is an incorrect ruling.

I have already said that the 1922 committee, under the 1922 Constitution, had no such restriction on the powers of Seanad Éireann. I have been advised that a simple motion in my name and in the names of other Senators to delete this Standing Order would be legally appropriate and that Seanad Éireann could do it, regardless of the CPP. In deference to the CPP, however, and in deference to Leas-Chathaoirleach and the Cathaoirleach, I put in a request. If one is not able to request something then there is no point in continuing.

Professor Gary Murphy of DCU has recently called for the abolition of the Seanad again, precisely because there has been no reform of any kind whatever; not a single stitch. This request is a significant reform that we could point to. All we are looking for is the right to debate issues. Every single Member of this House has complained about this restriction at one time or another.

I have received support in this regard, for which I am extremely grateful, from the entire Fianna Fáil Party, from the Sinn Féin Party, from the Labour Party and from the two sections of Independents in this House. That is very significant. I very much hope that my friends and colleagues in Fine Gael would find the courage to do the same and support this. It is actually a slavish following, with no argument, of a British parliamentary precedent. We are a republic. We should be prepared to take this on. I will be pushing this. I understand it is to be discussed at the next meeting of the CPP in May.

I very much hope that we will take a firm decision and make this small expansion of the powers of Seanad Éireann as a significant measure of reform.

As the Senator knows, the Cathaoirleach has made his ruling regarding this matter. It is not for me to second-guess him but I understand that the matter will be dealt with in a substantive way at the next meeting of the CPP. We must let it rest there for the moment.