Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)

When someone said that I would be out soon, I did not believe it for a minute as I knew this issue would attract lengthy discussion. The ability of the legal profession to engage in literary gymnastics when an issue is put before it never ceases to amaze me. I listened intently to Senator Regan and, whether we like it, he made his case. He acknowledged that we are obliged under the Constitution to provide for a criminal offence of blasphemy. There is no getting away from that. He tried to claim that I said there was no alternative, even though I made it clear that there are two alternatives - to hold a referendum on the matter or to drop the Bill altogether and leave this lacuna in our law. It was made clear in the judgment in the Corway case that blasphemy should be defined by the Legislature, rather than by the courts. That is why we are taking the first opportunity available to us to provide for such a definition. The Office of the Attorney General has given me strong advice to the effect that a defamation Bill that purports to repeal section 13 of the 1961 Act, which provides for the criminal offence of blasphemy, cannot be passed without saying something about this issue. The only alternative is to provide for an immediate referendum on the matter.

I agree with Senator Walsh that those who are calling for a referendum might not get the result they want. I am as good as the next person at understanding what is being said by grassroots people throughout the country. Those who called for a referendum on this issue to be tacked on to the second referendum on the Lisbon treaty, or to be held separately, should bear in mind that the political party that called for God to be taken out of the Constitution is no longer in existence. Where are the members of that party today?