Nama Bill passed as O'Toole criticises 'offensive' clause

SEANAD REPORT:THE BILL to establish the National Asset Management Agency was passed in the Senate last night by 28 votes to 23.

A provision in the Bill which involved a commitment that the Minister for Finance would not break the law, was earlier described as “offensive” by Joe O’Toole (Ind).

An undertaking was being given that the Minister would not approve a restructuring plan or a business plan that did not comply with Irish or EU law. The provision was unnecessary. In a modern democracy, it was taken for granted that a Minister was as amenable to the law of the land as the rest of the populace.

Minister for Defence Willie O’Dea responded that the State was seeking EU approval for Nama and, in doing so, it was important to make what was already implicit in the legislation absolutely explicit “and state in clear and unambiguous language that we will not approve any restructuring plan that contravenes EU law”.

Mr O’Toole said he understood the Minister’s point. “It is a belt and braces measure because the chaps in Brussels are watching too much television and they know that nobody in Ireland obeys the law. We must ensure the Minister does.”Alex White (Lab) said giving this commitment suggested that its purpose was to send a reassuring signal to the European Commission.

The execution in the US of sniper John Allen Muhammad, who shot and killed 10 people in the Washington DC area in 2002, triggered some bitter exchanges in the chamber.

Ivana Bacik (Lab) joined several colleagues in condemning the application of the death penalty. She went on to ask for a debate on the place of religion in education.

Noting that the European Court of Human Rights had ruled against the presence of crucifixes in classrooms, she said they must have regard to the fundamental principles of the Council of Europe and the need for tolerance and respect for those of other religions and none.

“Just because one religion is dominant in this country does not mean it should have a near monopoly on the provision of primary education.” She wanted a debate on the role of the integrated curriculum, whereby children were still receiving religious instruction during school hours in breach, she would contend, of their rights under Article 44 of the Constitution and under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Jim Walsh (FF) said it was difficult to listen to “brass neck” pronouncements by people who were so condemnatory of capital punishment but saw absolutely no incongruity with their support for abortion or euthanasia.

Describing Mr Walsh’s observation as absolutely outrageous, Ms Bacik said it was obvious that he was referring to her. “I ask Senator Walsh to withdraw any insinuation. If this was a courtroom and that was about libel, there would be a clear innuendo there.”

David Norris (Ind): “That man is always doing this and the Cathaoirleach should put him in his box.”

Cathaoirleach Pat Moylan said he could not deal with innuendo.

Mr Walsh said all the churches, and especially the Catholic Church, had made a tremendous contribution to the education of generations of Irish people. He would say to Senator Bacik “if the hat fits, let her wear it”.

Fidelma Healy Eames (FG) said: “This is character assassination.”

Paddy Burke (FG) said that at a time when the Government was considering cutting child welfare payments, it was outrageous that financial consultants could obtain huge fees to analyse a banking institution that was defunct.

Ernst Young was examining Irish Nationwide Building Society which would be either wound up, nationalised or taken under the wing of another financial institution. A senior accountant was being paid €3,000 per day and a junior accountant €800 daily. The nation could not afford such fees. The fees issue had arisen in the past in respect of tribunals, “but yet again we are overpaying fat cats”.