Alan Kelly (Tipperary, Labour) | Oireachtas source

This legislation has changed everything. There has been a great deal of solidarity during Covid and the motto that we have all adopted as a society is that we are all in this together, but that ends tonight. That is my view and the Labour Party's view. When Covid began, there was considerable co-operation with the Opposition. We always worked together. Sometimes that was below the radar and was not anything that we had to come in here and shout about.

I have been knocking around the Oireachtas nearly the same length of time as the Tánaiste, but I have rarely seen a Bill that was so badly handled. The Government has made a hames of this. It is a shambles. I am not sure that Ministers even know what it contains or what they are doing. They are afraid to be asked questions about it now. It is contradictory. I am deeply uncomfortable with it and I believe the Tánaiste is too. I know him well enough to say that. I would be surprised if he was not uncomfortable with this legislation. It is not just a shambles, but it is not based on public health advice either. We can see the holes in it. It is reactionary. Most of all, it is discriminatory, and the Labour Party can never support legislation that is discriminatory. There are serious legal questions over it. They will go to another forum after the Oireachtas.

What we are doing here crosses a line that should not be crossed, in that we isolate, treat people differently and say to people that because of the order we have decided they will be vaccinated, we can discriminate against them. It would be one thing to come in here, as flawed as this legislation is, if everyone had been offered a vaccine. As the Tánaiste knows, I am probably the most pro-vaccine person in here because I have spoken about vaccines for years. I attended the world vaccination conference in Brussels a number of years ago.

It is not just that. What is going on is also chaotic, with regard to the way this is being rushed through Government and the Dáil. Speaking off the record, Cabinet and junior Ministers are privately saying it is a shambles. No doubt, Government Deputies are saying it. The organs of the State, officials, are saying this is shambolic. The HSE is saying this is shambolic. It has enough to be doing now without being involved in something like this.

This will take over the Tánaiste's summer. Issues with this legislation, which we have not even thought of, will cause problems over the summer. Insurance will definitely come up over the summer. There will be issues all over the country. There will be contradictions, problems and issues we have not even thought of yet. The Tánaiste's Government will be dealing with them all summer.

We have a situation in which a senior Minister goes on the national airwaves to tell the country that people who have had Covid-19 should go to their GP to get a certificate in order to go into a pub or restaurant, only for a junior Minister to say she was wrong less than two hours later. He then gets contradicted by other Government sources last night. I knew about this a couple of days ago. GPs had been on to me. I hope I am clued into what is going on, but when I had to go to GPs to ask what they were doing as part of this and were they involved in the roll-out of certificates, I was categorically told "No". However, Ministers were saying "Yes". I had to double check and they said "No". I went round the country and asked a number of people. GPs have enough to be doing. The confusion is incredible and we are still not sure what role GPs will have. I suspect none. I do not think they should have a role because they have enough to be doing.

The entire saga has been a fiasco from the moment NPHET published its letter to suggest to the Government it would only allow vaccinated people into indoor dining for the summer. It was based on data and modelling that was out of date. The Tánaiste took a decision to endorse the plan without possession of the full facts. It is as simple as that. Then, the Tánaiste was either uninformed or misled on what was in front of him and Ministers are saying that privately. It should also be remembered the NPHET letter contained detailed information on case numbers from the UK but, mysteriously, had no data on hospitalisation figures from the UK.

The proposal outlined here will break social solidarity. It will cause havoc. The Tánaiste has, quite rightly, challenged the Opposition with regard to what we would do. I will say it. What the Tánaiste is proposing here is not based on full public health advice. There are many holes in it. The idea the Government has uniformly come up with a system - this mess - which is between the ditches of what public advice would allow, is not credible or true. There are so many holes in it, with regard to young people, the distinction between hotels and other dining areas and vaccinated people and unvaccinated people, and considerable stuff with regard to workers.

What would we do? I understand this industry is in serious trouble. Before I entered politics, I worked in Bord Fáilte and Fáilte Ireland. I understand the industry intensely and yes, we do need a plan to reopen. However, instead of coming up with this completely convoluted system which is unenforceable, devoid of the reality of what needs to be done, counterproductive with regard to public health and which will cause huge anger and, I can guarantee, raise a whole range of legal issues, we should have opened up in a safe way with new modelling based on all the data and new vaccinations, and have a testing regime for those in order that people are not discriminated against.

The Tánaiste knows I was the first Deputy to raise antigen testing. It was so long ago, we were in Leinster House. The fact is the Tánaiste supports antigen testing. He said it on the floor to me in response numerous times. We have the Ferguson report but we cannot use it. Now have to set up a new implementation again, which is fine. However, the fact is it is so late. We are doing all these test events but nothing is coming about from them. In some in industries it is fine to use antigen testing, if one is a lorry driver, etc., but we cannot use antigen testing in other areas. It is completely contradictory.

We would do the full modelling, have the European travel certificate, PCR and antigen testing and there would have to be a roll-out of ventilation systems and measurement of ventilation because we all know airborne transmission and the way it is done, is critical. I have written to the Government on this. I did not even receive a reply from the Taoiseach or the Minister for Health. There are so many good technologies out there now. I went to the extent of visiting a location that manufactures or sells them. They would be a huge aide. Put all that together and that is the solution we would put forward. No solution is perfect, I grant the Tánaiste that, but it would be a damn better solution than what he is putting forward here which discriminates against so many people.

We also have to ally into the fact that with the volume of people being vaccinated and 7% of the adult population being vaccinated per week, I hope more than 80% of adults will be vaccinated in four weeks' time. That should also be factored into the modelling. I have a real, genuine question. The Tánaiste spoke earlier about PCR and antigen testing. At least he came in and addressed it because there is such confusion out there. The Tánaiste said provisions are made through the Bill, etc., even though they are not directly stated, but I get what he is saying. I appreciate that because, finally, we had some bit of clarity on it.

Can I ask the Tánaiste a question? What is the difference or what variables will change with regard to how successful PCR and antigen testing technologies are, between now and when we could potentially use them in a few months' time? It is not about vaccinations. I am talking about the success and reliability of those technologies and tests. What will have changed? Zero. Nothing. Why can we not use them now? It is a critical question. I do not understand it. It is a complete contradiction. It would be far better than what we are putting forward at present.

The issue of discrimination is profound in this legislation. It is the first time I have seen it as blatant. I spoke about it a number of weeks ago in this Chamber. I said it was bananas. It is. I did not think we would have a Government which would come to this day and do this, especially when it had alternatives and would not stick rigidly to public health advice. I accept the Government has to take on board public health advice but I also accept that, at times, it will have to tweak and vary it.

That is why our solution would have been far more credible. This is to discriminate against people, and broadly young people. Dare I say it, a category here has been forgotten, that is, the people between 60 and 70 years old, cohorts 4 and 7, and some healthcare workers who were vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine and are only getting their second vaccine now. They will have to wait a number of weeks to be fully vaccinated. Even though they are in their 60s they will not be able to use or leverage this for a number of weeks. Just to put it on the record, I have major respect for the vaccination teams and work done by the HSE. There are doing an incredible and heroic job.

This legislation is not based solely on public health advice. It is reactionary. It is certainly not based on full scientific advice, given the contradictions in it. I also wish to ask about enforceability. This is "an Irish solution to an Irish problem". That awful phrase that was used for so many years is more apt here. Let us be honest about it. This is going to be case of a nod and a wink. It is not going to be enforced. Many people working in hospitality are young. They will not be able to enforce this on the front line. There is going to be no follow-up on it. What will the HSA be able to do? The HSE certainly will not be doing anything relating to it. First, it does not want to, because it has enough to do. Second, it does not have the resources. As regards An Garda Síochána, if one speaks to gardaí about being dragged into this, they are not going anywhere near it. It will be completely unenforceable. It is not practical either.

I also have questions about some legal issues. How will we ensure data protection and the application of the GDPR across the board? How do we know there will not be a raft of cases relating to this, as regards people's medical histories? What provisions have been made to deal with that? With regard to employment law, no employer has an entitlement to ask an employee whether he or she is vaccinated. If two chefs are working in a restaurant, they will have to be 2 m apart. How is that going to work? How will it be enforced? What happens if an employer says that they have to work closer together and rams people in? How will all these issues work from a public health and health and safety perspective?

There are also a number of inherent contradictions as regards vaccinated people versus the unvaccinated people who are allowed in some settings, that is, hotels, but not in the restaurant next door. How is that credible? I spoke earlier to the Taoiseach about summer camps. My two children, Aoibhe and Senan, asked why they could not go to summer camps. I would sacrifice going into any pub over the summer if both of them could go to their summer camps. It is not credible that they could be in school a couple of weeks ago, but they cannot go to a summer camp. If I have one small thing to ask, it is that the Tánaiste reconsider this. Please, reconsider it. They only have a few weeks in the summer, and not every young person is interested in sports. I know that. While the Tánaiste says there is some form of concern from a public health perspective, he is allowing children into pubs and restaurants but not into their classes, be they dancing, LEGO or other classes. There is a moral issue there. They can go into a pub, but cannot go into a class. I ask the Tánaiste to please look at this again.

The other issue that worries me is the impact this will have on the HSE as regards resources, and the deep concerns it has about this.

There is also the issue of why the Government could not adopt the travel certificate and the testing regime, along with the ventilation. It could present it to the public, say it is going to have a good enforcement regime and a standard it wants everybody to adopt, rather than go down this road. I have spoken to young people. Many of them have contacted me in the last week since I raised this issue in the Dáil. They are simply going to get on a flight or go to the North. That is a statement to the Government. It is saying: "Our country is discriminating against us, so we are going to do what we want and need to do elsewhere". That is completely contradictory.

The sunset clause is another issue. I believe the sunset clause is in this legislation because it has to be for fear the legislation may not be constitutional. If there was no sunset clause, the risk of it being unconstitutional is higher. The sunset clause means we will be coming back to the Dáil in a few months to discuss the issues regarding vaccinations, how transmissible the disease is and so forth. We know there are going to be variants and other issues. The Minister will just return to the Dáil and we will rehash the debate. Is that what is going to happen? I have an issue with why that sunset clause was included in that manner.

Ultimately, the real issue is that this is discriminatory, unenforceable, unworkable and confusing. It is not balanced or fair. It is riddled with contradictions as regards public health advice. It is unscientific. It is legislatively and constitutionally dubious. It is a really sad day for our country that the motto that we are all in this together has simply gone out the window. I am deeply uncomfortable with the Bill. There is no way we could support it. We have put forward an alternative and, at this stage, I still ask the Tánaiste to consider it.

See this speech in context