Dáil debates

Wednesday, 9 September 2020

Health Act 1947 (Section 31A - Temporary Restrictions) (Covid-19) (No. 4) Regulations 2020: Motion [Private Members]

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Catherine ConnollyCatherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Minister was in the room because I do not like giving out about somebody behind his or her back and I certainly intend to give out about him in respect of his contribution. The first thing he should have told us was that these regulations run out next Monday and what he intends to do on Monday when they run out. He then went on to tell us that it would be greatly damaging to the effort in protecting people from the virus if we abandoned these regulations. I am afraid that what is greatly damaging to our ability to deal with this virus is the complete shambles that is the Government's approach. I do not believe in fake news in respect of this virus. I believe it is extremely dangerous. However, the way that information is being given to us is disingenuous, to put it mildly. I have said repeatedly that I gave my backing to draconian legislation from the beginning because I realised the seriousness of the threat we were facing and because there were good measures in the legislation, on the basis that there would be full and frank disclosure. That has never happened.

The message also was that we were all in this together. We are certainly not all in this together. The meat factories were never in this with us. I refer to the nursing homes, direct provision centres and people aged over 70, who were singled out in a most despicable way as if it was an order, but it was not really an order. We set back equality between the age groups so far it is very difficult to even think about it.

In addition, there is no engagement at all with the Dáil. Last week, I voted against the legislation after thinking about it, reading about it and so on. There was no mention that there would be regulations the very next day obliging the gardaí to keep a record. That was not articulated to us. We found that out on the airwaves. We heard from the likes of Deputy MacSharry, who I find myself in agreement with, although certainly not with his use of language when he decried it, but I agree with him in principle. However, the Deputy had an opportunity to discuss that the day before, as a backbencher, through the new arrangements that give them more time and that time was not used to make these views known. More important, however, the Minister did not make us aware of it. These regulations were also introduced through a media campaign where it was made known that we would let the gardaí go into our homes if there were more than a certain number of people in them. That was then disowned by the various Ministers who came in, and none of them knew where it came from. We have a totally irresponsible media if they put it about that the gardaí were going to go into people's homes. Either this Government did something drastically wrong with its message or it sent out that message to fly a kite and then changed its mind.

I have the report from the Policing Authority, which I have referred to repeatedly. It is the sixth report from the authority, which greatly praises the gardaí but highlights its concerns, as mentioned, earlier in respect of spit hoods and not recording the ethnicity of the people involved when incidents occur. Importantly, however, it refers to the failure by the top echelons of the Garda to give the information on the existing powers gardaí have and the disaggregation of those powers to direct a person to comply with a regulation, arrest for failure to comply with a direction, and three more powers. The authority stated that it is of concern that it has failed to get the information it has repeatedly asked for.

We are now in a position where we have these regulations that run out on Monday and a media campaign that tells us that wet pubs and dry pubs should never have been distinguished one from the other and that all pubs should have opened with appropriate restrictions. We are being told now that if there is 2 m between people, they can stay longer. If there is only 1 m distancing in the pub, they will have to leave at a particular time. If they go outside for a smoke, they will have to sit, and so on. This is absurd. It is really showing a lack of leadership and giving a completely mixed message to the public. As my colleague, Deputy Pringle, and others said, the people are way ahead of us.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.