Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)

In passing, I remind the Government of the consequences of the Brendan Smyth case.

The incompetence of the Government with regard to this issue was further highlighted by the attempt to play politics with this serious matter. A more serious issue could not come before this House. When the Minister represented his own role to the Oireachtas in a bid to save his own skin, blaming everyone and everything instead of dealing with the problem, it was total evidence of incompetence.

As far as Fine Gael is concerned, the major issue from the beginning was that this legal loophole be closed. We wanted a clear message from the Oireachtas to the paedophiles and sexual predators of the country that this legal loophole would be closed. The message would be that from now on, if a person interfered with or abused children, a law was in place to put that person behind bars, for life if necessary in some instances.

I welcome this Bill despite the incompetence of the Government and the rejections of our offers of co-operation, especially at the early stage. I welcome it despite the contemptible approach of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to the first Bill we drafted last week. I want the gap, the legal loophole, to be closed. The Fine Gael Party, our leader and I have never deviated from that fundamental concept.

We should touch on another aspect of the issue. The Bill at long last before the House proves that democratic politics work. Despite the fact that we initially had a Government in denial, a Taoiseach who stated that nobody would walk free and a Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who argued there was no gaping hole in the law, we have a Bill before the House which I hope will be law before the night is out. This shows that the strength of democratic politics rose to the test, that the attitude of the Opposition ultimately had to be taken on board by Government and that we will end up with that law tonight.

This law will not be retrospective. The issue has arisen because the law was not reformed in the past. It arises because various signals, including a communication to the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in 2002, were not picked up. It arises despite the fact that the newspapers made the information public last year, and despite an article in the Law Society Gazette in October 2005. I agree with the Tánaiste's statement that it would not have been easy to tackle the 1935 Act, nor would it have been very popular to do so. Does the Government not realise that the strength of democratic politics to which I referred earlier was based on an all-party approach, the same all-party approach that attempted to grapple with the difficulties under Article 35 of the Constitution? The committee dealing with that issue, on which there is an Opposition majority, was prepared to take an approach on the question of costs that could not be deemed populist. That route has not been followed.

Another aspect has been largely overlooked in this debate about legalities, namely the victims and their parents. At the very minimum I would have expected from the Minister, in introducing this Bill to the House, an expression of regret and an apology to victims, their parents and all the parents of this country, most of whom are thinking: "There but for the grace of God go I". Some, perhaps, will have a more practical appreciation of what it means. An expression of regret from the Government would be appropriate before this day ends.

I am prepared to accept the Bill on Second Stage, because I feel a stakeholder in it. Some 90% of the Bill is based on the Fine Gael Bill.

See this speech in context