David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

It is an honour to be in the presence of Ms Nabagesera because we revere her for her extraordinary courage. None of us in this country who have been involved in easier aspects of this trouble have had to confront anything like the brutality, the viciousness and violence that happens in Uganda. I was also honoured to meet David Kato at a meeting of Front Line Defenders in Dublin Castle and I had no idea that within a matter of months he would be so savagely murdered. It is very important that Ms Nabagesera is here and that people here who may have different views on this issue should hear what it is like because it is so clearly a fundamental human rights issue.

The briefing was helpful but only 10% of it was relevant to the gay issue. The others had some marginal relevance but they displayed a remarkable degree of corruption within the Government of Uganda which is a difficulty that must be examined. It was very interesting and useful that Ms Nabagesera was able to tell us that, as I suspected, it would be counterproductive to have used sanctions and so on because people would then be punished again.

I would like to ask about a couple of issues that might be helpful and which our committee might consider. In the list of aid that we give €500,000 goes to male advocacy. I assume that is for violence against women but I wonder if we could earmark some for this very specific area. Would that be useful or would that also expose gay people to antagonism? Looking at it from outside I think that could be helpful but I might be quite wrong.

Could Ms Nabagesera signal to us the names of some of the leading members, starting with herself and David Kato's bereaved, elderly and sick mother? Having been interested for a very long time in human rights I have found when I travel or even at a meeting such as this that if one signals directly to the diplomatic representatives here and asks them to transmit to their capital that as a people, a Government and a committee on foreign affairs we are taking a specific interest in the welfare of these people it may serve to protect them. If Ms Nabagesera feels that would be useful perhaps she could supply us with an appropriate list. We cannot protect the whole gay population but it would be helpful if key people could be protected.

I want to know about the type of pressure we could apply. I say with great sorrow as a practising and believing Christian that it seems to me that the Christian churches are almost entirely responsible for this appalling mess and it is a disgrace. That is the European inheritance. That is what they imported, not homosexuality, which exists throughout the mammalian kingdom. We have an interesting situation here where the Papal Nuncio is the doyen of the diplomatic corps and it might be possible for us to write a polite letter asking that the hierarchy in Uganda make it very clear that this is not consonant with Christianity at all. I would be happy to write privately to the Archbishop of Canterbury who I imagine would be surprised to learn of my existence but as an Anglican I think we should lean on him and on the Archbishop of Dublin as well.

I do not wish to take up too much of Ms Nabagesera's time but I would like to know if any of these measures would be helpful or if any are completely out of order. Why not try to get something done at the Inter-Parliamentary Union? It deals with journalists' standards. There are also the International Press Association and the NUJ. The newspapers have taken this up because the sensationalist events earn money for them, particularly when churches show pornography. It might be possible to explore those avenues. I will be interested to know if any of these suggestions would be counter-productive or if any of them would be good and if so could Ms Nabagesera facilitate us?