Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

My party has already stated it will not be found wanting in finding a solution to what we accept is a potential problem with our Constitution. However, we question the timing and method of finding that solution. I am utterly convinced that every State has the right to protect and secure the integrity of its borders and its citizenship rights. If those borders and citizenship rights are no longer legally secure, for whatever reason, and if this insecurity or vulnerability has implications for other countries, we do not just have a right but an obligation to take whatever steps are necessary to regain control and determine precisely how the very considerable privilege of citizenship is to be attained.

Why are we dealing with this Bill now? What is the rush? I recall emergency legislation that was promised in the context of the need to finish the motorway in my constituency. It was promised almost three months ago and it pertains to a real emergency and a job that cannot be completed because of the absence of such legislation, yet this Bill can come from nowhere almost overnight. Why are we dealing with it now? There are so many other immigration issues that have not been resolved. Why do we force economic migrants into the soul-destroying and absolutely demoralising asylum seeking process? After forcing them into this process, they are not allowed work and when they do not work we call them wasters. Why not take time and proceed in a way that will build consensus? I heard the Tánaiste state it is difficult to achieve complete agreement. It is, but a majority recognises there is a problem and would be constructive in helping to solve it.

I have no doubt that our acceptance that there is a problem is viewed by some as racist. Worse, I believe the issue will be used by real racists to reinforce their existing prejudices and to air them with impunity over the coming months. Worse again, the Government knew this. At some level — although the Government denies it — this is part of the reason this referendum is being proposed at this time. The Minister has shown that he knows exactly the potential electoral advantage of creating a bogeyman for the public to fear and offering oneself as its saviour.

The arguments regarding the need to deal with the problem which has arisen as a result of the Good Friday Agreement are compelling and stand in their own right without any need to resort to the kind of unsubstantiated old guff which, unfortunately, we frequently hear about racism nowadays. We may think we have heard a lot of guff recently but when we get into the campaign for the local and European elections, every other issue will be forgotten in a frenzy of racist accusations and counter accusations — these may be made privately on doorsteps but they will be made. We have managed to keep a lid on this problem for some time but once we cross the Rubicon of raw, open and vicious racism, there is no undoing the damage and no turning back. Once we have debate openly acknowledging real naked racial hatred, the situation will be irretrievable and there will be no turning back. On its own, this is the most compelling reason not to hold the referendum in the pressure cooker context of a political election where individual candidates have so much of their personal reputation and future at stake that, as anyone who has ever been a candidate knows, reason and moderation go out the window. Here we have a perfect topic for them.

The second reason for waiting is that if we rush at this change, there is every danger that we will get it wrong. We made a constitutional mistake, have known that for six years and have seen its impact over a number of years. Up to three weeks ago there was no rush to do anything to close this particular loophole. However, suddenly in the space of three short weeks it has become a crisis with which we must deal immediately. In those three weeks we have recalled the Dáil, the referendum Bill has been published, draft legislation has been published and we must get it through as quickly as possible so that it can be put to the people in six weeks time. Why is this? I do not understand the reason for the speed. How can the Government blame us for thinking that this is all about gaining some kind of electoral advantage?

The reality is that if we get this wrong — and many people have mentioned the dangers of getting it wrong — there will be no electoral advantage for anybody. We will get it wrong if we rush at it. We all know the potential pitfalls of messing about with our Constitution, even when we give it all the thought and time in the world. Most of us accept that we have left an unintended loophole in the Constitution. If we are lucky, we will probably get one shot at fixing it. We do not always get even that one shot. I dread mentioning the infamous abortion referenda fiascos. We got it wrong that time and the situation was irretrievable; we could never get it right afterwards. There is every danger that we will do the same again. Nobody was happy after several attempts to change the Constitution regarding abortion and there is every possibility that on a controversial issue such as this, the same will happen.

I urge the Minister to proceed slowly with caution and to try to build consensus. He should refer this issue to the All-Party Committee on the Constitution and let us as dispassionately as possible look at all the angles and options and return to the issue in the autumn. The issue should not be postponed indefinitely but we should return to it in the autumn with clear heads and the clearer views we all tend to have after an election.

As health spokesperson for my party I wish to refer to the maternity hospital issue and to the suggestion that this referendum is the result of a request from the masters of the maternity hospitals——

See this speech in context