Willie Penrose (Westmeath, Labour)

I also find the Minister's response disappointing. I believe that her heart is in it. The purpose of the amendment is to give recognition to our language and promote its importance, which we have an obligation to do.

The other amendments are designed to provide greater flexibility and loosen the bureaucratic straitjacket currently contained in the Bill. I accept that there have been many major improvements but the Bill makes things easy from an administrative point of view. Somebody is ensuring that there will be a straight line and that there will be no deviations. Ease of administration, not upholding the right for the Irish language to be granted a significant position, appears to be of paramount importance.

There is no provision in the Bill, as currently drafted, to change a forename once it has already been changed. One of our amendments would provide that flexibility. In that context, I am disappointed. We feel strongly about this matter and we indicated on Committee Stage that we would push matters to the fullest on Report Stage. We are disappointed with the Minister's reply. I am of the opinion that administrative considerations have won out. I accept that the Minister indicated that there are cultural and other concerns but, like everything else, people would get used to it in a short period.

I am glad that people's religious and cultural backgrounds will be accommodated on birth certificates in our new multi-ethnic, multiracial and multicultural society. That is important. The Minister would probably say that this is superfluous. However, I have a strong view on legislation, namely, if in doubt, include. I have learned that from experience.

See this speech in context