Ivana Bacik

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I support Senator Twomey’s call for a debate on legislation to provide a regulatory framework for assisted human reproduction and in particular in vitro fertilisation, which is long overdue. A former Member of this House, Dr. Mary Henry, was very active in trying to get the matter placed on the Government agenda. I call on the Leader to have that debate as a matter of urgency.

I ask the Leader to invite the Minister for Health and Children to the House to discuss a particular issue regarding the waste of public moneys. As we are debating reform of the public service and issues of waste in the public finance, one report slipped somewhat under the radar last week. That was a report by the Dáil’s Committee of Public Accounts, which was highlighted in an article by Fintan O’Toole in Tuesday’s edition of The Irish Times. That committee reported on an outrageous waste of public money in the health service. As one of its key points, the report highlighted the direct subsidy that goes from the public health system to the private health insurance market. In 2006 almost 25% of public hospital beds were occupied by private patients, but the HSE recovered just 7% of the cost of running hospitals from the insurance companies, showing a marked subsidy from the public purse for the private insurance sector.

A point that stood out as scandalous and that needs to be addressed by the Minister in the House is the report’s exposure of the State paying publicly contracted consultants private fees to treat their public patients, in some cases even in public hospitals. I am talking about the National Treatment Purchase Fund. I did not understand that fund was designed to enable the payment of consultants working in Irish hospitals to treat patients who were already on their own public waiting lists and enabling the patients to jump the queue in that way. Staggeringly the National Treatment Purchase Fund paid for 1,774 patients who were treated in public hospitals. This should be a matter of major concern to all of us on both sides of this House at a time when the public purse is so straitened. When we are all looking at ways to make savings, this is an obvious way to do so.

The health service has been scandalously badly run. We have seen dreadful things like the cancellation of the roll-out of the cervical cancer vaccination scheme, while at the same time there is this ongoing wastage which should be cured and at the very least debated in this House. I call on the Leader to bring in the Minister for Health and Children to answer questions.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: Will the Leader arrange a debate on equality in health care provision? I note from reports yesterday that the Minister for Health and Children will intervene to ensure that older people will not have to pay massive premiums on foot of the Supreme Court decision on risk equalisation. It would be timely in that context to discuss equality and universality in the provision of health care. Clearly, the most equitable way to provide for health care would be to provide for a universal health insurance system. We should all be concerned about the Government announcement that it will introduce measures to penalise those who take out health insurance late. We need to debate universality of health care provision.

I support Senator Fitzgerald’s call for a debate on women’s representation in politics, which is another aspect of equality about which we should all be concerned. The percentage of women representatives in the Dáil and Seanad is very low and Ireland ranks very low by international standards in this regard. I am organising an event to commemorate the 90th anniversary of the election of the first woman, Countess Constance Markievicz, and the first occasion when women were entitled to vote, which was the 1918 general election held 90 years ago this December. On 9 December I will host an event for former and current women Members of the Oireachtas to celebrate the achievement of women in politics.

The event will also illustrate to all of us how low the proportion of women in political life remains. It would be very useful for us to have a debate in December on how best we can achieve a greater number of women in the Oireachtas.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I am rather uncomfortable about the apparent obsession with women’s reproductive capacity that is displayed by some Members of this House. I note that Senators on the other side have expressed their support for Senator Mullen’s legislation. While I do not imagine I will support it, I look forward to seeing Members on the Government side crossing the floor — one needs to put one’s money where one’s mouth is — to support the Bill when Senator Mullen introduces it.

I would like to ask the Leader for a debate on a far more pressing matter, which has been mentioned by Senators Fitzgerald and Norris today and which I raised yesterday. I refer to the need to allow female genital mutilation to be used as a ground when people from other countries are applying to be granted leave to remain here, which has arisen in the context of the case of Ms Pamela Izevbekhai. All of us should be concerned that her deportation would have been allowed under Irish law, as interpreted by the High Court, if it had not been for the welcome intervention of the European Court of Human Rights. I wrote to the Minister yesterday to ask him to give Ms Izevbekhai and her daughters leave to remain here on humanitarian grounds. I hope other colleagues on both sides of the House will put similar pressure on the Minister. That is very important.

I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on the implications of the budget cuts on people with disabilities. I note that Senator Ross has tabled an Adjournment debate matter concerning the Centre for Deaf Studies in Trinity College. I share his concern about the apparent ending of the Higher Education Authority’s core funding for the centre. Having worked with the centre, I am familiar with the important work it does.

We need a debate on the impact the budget cuts will have on people with disabilities. The centre for deaf studies will be unable to offer training in Irish sign language and English interpretation. Even in the narrow context of the courtroom, it is very important that training for interpreters is provided so that people with hearing disabilities can participate in legal processes.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I echo the calls made for a debate on the economy and the position of the banks. We should have this debate rather than the debate proposed for Private Members’ time on Wednesday on tourism. Important though that subject is, the economy should be a more pressing issue of concern for us at present.

I note Senator O’Toole’s point that there may be a cycle of fear whereby people are afraid to spend, even where their money and income are secure, because of the threat of recession looming. There is a human element of compassion to that as people do not want to be seen to be spending, or flathúlach in their spending when there is a recession and others around them are losing their jobs. A recession anxiety has gripped the country and it is not only a matter of talking things down. In that context we need a debate on that matter and a chance to put on the record the issues and criticisms which some Members on the other side of the House expressed about public services and the issues and criticisms those on this side of the House expressed about the banks’ guarantee. The article in The Irish Times yesterday by a number of leading academic economists outlined for us the problems with the banks’ guarantee and the prospect that we will need an investment, a conditional investment, so banks are obliged to lend to small businesses and not sit on the assets they have.

I call for a debate on the pressing issue of female genital mutilation and the need for legislation to prohibit that practice in Ireland. This issue is topical today when an unfortunate decision was made by the High Court to refuse leave to remain in Ireland to a Nigerian woman who applied to stay because she is in fear that her two young daughters will be circumcised if she returns to Nigeria. I took part in a dignified vigil at the weekend in support of this woman and her family. She has many supporters in her local community and throughout Ireland.

In the context of the court’s decision, which is about female genital mutilation and the fear of that on return to a country of origin, I call for a debate, as a matter of urgency, on our attitude to female genital mutilation, the need for legislation to prohibit the practice in Ireland and to extend jurisdiction to where it is practised elsewhere and where there is a connection to this country.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I support and will, if necessary, second the amendment proposed to the Order of Business by Senator Fitzgerald on the need for a debate on the Government U-turn on the cervical cancer vaccination programme. The impressive and inspiring Nobel prize-winning scientist who spoke on “Morning Ireland” today concluded that the vaccination programme would save lives. This makes clear what the Government’s reversal of policy means for women and young girls. Women, anyone with an interest in public health promotion and all those who have young daughters should be supportive of the need for a reversal of the Government’s reversal and a return to the Minister for Health and Children’s original position of three months ago that the programme would be rolled out next year. A debate is needed.

I am pleased to announce I will speak at a feminist open forum protest at 2 p.m. on Saturday at the spire on O’Connell Street. We ask people to come forward and express their opposition to the Government’s reversal.

I want to ask the Deputy Leader whether he will support the protest in opposition to the postponement of the roll-out of the vaccination programme.

Will the Deputy Leader clarify something the Leader said in the House on Tuesday in response to my question about the Climate Protection Bill which, as Members know, is before the House? Its resumed debate is extremely topical, particularly in light of the recent shocking report on pollution levels in Ireland by the Environmental Protection Agency. I want to ask the Deputy Leader for clarification as to when precisely in the spring the Leader proposes to resume the debate on this Bill. The Leader said on Tuesday that early in the next session, in the spring, he would have the Bill come back to the House. I want to ask the Deputy Leader to confirm also that Government time will be given to debate the Climate Protection Bill, to resume Second Stage and move it on, because that was what had originally been agreed in October last year when the Bill was first debated before the House. Clearly the need for its debate has become more pressing and urgent in the light of recent reports.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I ask the Leader for a debate on the conduct of business in the Seanad. Many of us on this side have been severely critical of the absence of legislation before the House, but that does not mean we are critical of debates and statements. We all accept there are some important debates that must be had and in the course of making statements on issues we can express ourselves fully. That is important, but there is a need for balance between legislation, which is our primary function, and statements on issues. Where we have statements on issues we participate fully. I take issue with those on the other side who suggest that, on the fishing issue, for example, we have not been fully participative. I participated in debates on fishing a number of times last year and got the Minister to do a U-turn on cockle dredging in Waterford Harbour. I am delighted that was as a result of debates on fishing, and such debates can have an important effect.

On what we can say in debates, we are entitled as legislators to criticise Cardinal Brady when he strays into criticising the Legislature or legislation that we may pass. It is also perfectly right that we criticise newspapers we see as representing the equivalent of the paramilitary wing of the Catholic church, which the Alive! newspaper represents. It is a newspaper that puts forward very extreme views with which many moderate Catholics disagree.

I ask for a debate on the role of the Equality Authority in light of the swinging cuts that have been made. We need to have the Minister in the House to answer questions on why the authority has been singled out in this way, given the good work it has done.

I am grateful to Senator Quinn for pointing out a report on page two of The Irish Times on the EU management committee on fruit and vegetables, which is changing its views on the minimum rules and standards for the shape and size of vegetables. My colleagues may remember the big outcry when the EU declared that bananas had to be straight. I am afraid to say that among the long list of fruit and vegetables that will be covered by the new rule, bananas are not included, so straight bananas will continue to be an EU requirement.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I am grateful for the time. Like every Member who has spoken today, I condemn the dreadful murder of Shane Geoghegan in Limerick and extend sympathies to his bereaved family. It is time we had a debate on how best to deal with gangland murder. The focus on sanctions and trial processes is not the most effective response for the victims of this appalling crime. We would be better placed examining investigation, detection and how best to reassure potential witnesses. In catching people and ensuring they are convicted of crimes, it is crucial that evidence can be gathered. Before any case goes to court, it is important that the Garda Síochána has the ability to gather evidence. Chief among the tasks of the Garda Síochána is to reassure potential witnesses that they will not be intimidated and will be protected if they come forward and give the evidence necessary to prosecute and convict people.

The Special Criminal Court is used for organised crime. It can be used because the Director of Public Prosecutions has the power to refer all sorts of crimes for trial before that non-jury court. We already have extensive severe penalties. We brought in such penalties, mandatory minimum sentences, in 2006 in respect of firearms offences. We must examine witness protection programmes and reassurance for potential witnesses. These are the key areas in terms of effective prevention of this sort of appalling crime.

I seek a debate on the Climate Protection Bill, which I have sought a number of times. I renew my call given the absence of other legislation in the House.

I add my voice to the voices of others, calling for an urgent debate on the future of the Equality Authority. I do not agree that this authority is part of some human rights industry. One can examine the very human cases the authority has supported, such as the Christian Brother in his 70s, who last week won his claim of age discrimination against a car hire company, thereby changing policies on car hire for older people. We see the real people who are being helped by the Equality Authority and who will miss the authority in its watered down form.

There is a question as to why it has been singled out in this way. That must be answered. We need a debate in the House and the Minister should answer us why he is watering down the protections offered to ordinary people by the authority in this way.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I renew my call for an answer to my question on when the debate on the Climate Protection Bill 2008 can be resumed. This is the third day I have asked the question. I asked the Deputy Leader the question on Tuesday and was given an ambiguous answer on the resumption of the debate. I am anxious to have the debate resumed. It is timely in a week when a US President has been elected who is committed to reducing emissions in the US by 80% by 2050 and the British Parliament passed a law last week which will have the same effect. It is timely that we have a debate on this Bill, which aims to achieve the same result in Ireland. I ask the Leader for a less ambiguous response or I will have to call next week for an amendment to the Order of Business on this matter.

I also ask the Leader for a debate on the cutbacks to human rights and equality bodies, in particular the Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority. The severe cuts represent a quiet coup that undermines and neuters these two very important bodies. There had been, prior to the budget, a well publicised proposal that the bodies might be merged, but, happily, that was not done. The effect of the serious cutbacks in funding provided for the bodies next year will have a similar effect of neutering voices that were justifiably critical of certain Government policies.

At a time when there are severe rises in unemployment, with a record rise of 15,000 in the last month alone, we need real protections for the vulnerable and disadvantage in our society. It is very short-sighted to cut funding for human rights and the Equality Authority.

Order of Business

Senator Ivana Bacik: I ask the Deputy Leader for a debate on the Climate Protection Bill 2007, which I introduced to the House in October last year and which still has to resume on Second Stage. In the justified uproar and protests over the dreadful budget, it may have missed the attention of those in government that last week the UK passed the first binding climate change law. The new British Act sets a legally binding target for the UK to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. It has been welcomed by the majority of businesses there as setting an incentive for them to reduce their emissions and move to low carbon technologies.

In a week when the Green Party is seeking a debate on this issue, it would be appropriate to have a further debate on the Climate Protection Bill.

It is unfortunate that this Bill was not passed into law before the British Act was passed, but given that they have passed it, it shows that an argument against passing our Bill into law has been removed. It is clearly possible and practical to pass legislation creating binding targets for reductions in carbon emissions. It is becoming obvious that we have no option but to do so, or else we will never meet the modest Kyoto targets. I ask the Deputy Leader for further time to debate Second Stage and, if necessary, to move on to the next Stage of the Climate Protection Bill. It is vital that we do so, and there is a great deal of support across the parties in this House, and in the other House, for that.

I ask the Deputy Leader also for a debate on protections of listed buildings. In recent weeks we have seen the destruction of two buildings — a 19th century Methodist church near Croke Park and a 19th century convent in Terenure, for which a developer was fined a derisory €1,000 for illegally demolishing that convent. There appears to be an absence of appropriate sanctions for developers who demolish buildings illegally and, with the Green Party in Government, it would be appropriate to debate that issue.

There has been a good deal of misplaced concern expressed in this House about the protection of embryos in terms of embryonic stem cell research. We might reflect on the real concern we should feel for people we know who have Parkinson’s disease or other degenerative diseases and for whom research of this type can offer a real prospect of treatment for the future. We should not close the door on them and lack compassion towards them when we are debating stem cell research.

That is the real issue for us and that is where our concern would be better placed.