Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

This summer Irish audiences are watching with new eyes a dark and divisive chapter in Irish politics. It has been described as spellbinding, heart-rending and harrowing, and has pitted brother against brother, sister against sister, friend against friend. That is the Progressive Democrats Party's contribution to the summer of politics in the letter from its trustees. I understand that "The Wind that Shakes the Barley" is also packing them in.

The Taoiseach might wonder what that has to do with Leaders' Questions and I will tell him. Last night, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, on behalf of the Fine Gael Party, proposed a simple Bill dealing with home defence to do three things, namely, to remove any question of home owners having to retreat, to prevent intruders to a household from suing a home owner who acts reasonably, and to create the presumption that force used by a home owner in defending his wife, family and home is reasonable.

The Government refused to accept that Bill because the feud in the Progressive Democrats camp sparked by the writing of a Bill for a Progressive Democrats Senator by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has been carried into the heart of Government and is affecting its work. The Taoiseach has effectively mollified the sweet 16 people on his own backbenches, at least for the moment, but the recent rumpus within the Progressive Democrats is affecting the work of the Government the Taoiseach leads.

I have three questions for the Taoiseach. Does he believe that a home owner should have to retreat if his home is invaded or subject to intrusion? Does he believe that a home owner should have to prove that the force he used in defending his home is reasonable? Does he think that a home owner should be liable to be sued by someone who breaks into his home by day or night? Does the Taoiseach believe that is reasonable? These are simple questions arising from Deputy Jim O'Keeffe's home defence Bill.

See this speech in context