John Paul Phelan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I apologise for not being in the building for the Minister’s introduction to this legislation. I must admit that I find myself badly torn on this legislation because for a long time I have been a strong proponent of trying to get the hospitality sector open. However, I have concerns on some of the issues that have been raised by others, namely, the sharing of medical data with third parties, in this case with businesses, and the demands that will put on those businesses. I am also concerned about the implementation of the provisions of this legislation. My chief concern is with the need to provide an alternative to this vaccine passport.

I note that in the contributions I have heard that people have been temperate in their use of language. I join with other Deputies in expressing my disgust with some Members of the House and with some communications I have received which have used terms like “apartheid” and referred to the Star of David and things like this.

It is a despicable false equivalence for the people who endured such terrors under those regimes. What we are being asked to address here today is serious and there are a few questions I want to pose to the Minister directly. The most obvious one, to which I think I know the answer already, is why we are doing this now. Why are we seeking to divide different groups such as younger people from older people who are vaccinated? I have an underlying condition and I have been fully vaccinated for quite some time. I know we are doing this to ensure that the hospitality sector can have a summer of some sort but some tweaks must be made to the methods in this legislation and other measures because they contain a number of obvious contradictions. I will refer to them later if I get a chance.

At the start of the week we were told that 55% of the population had been fully vaccinated. Based on the advice he has received, how many people does the Minister expect to be totally vaccinated by 26 July? When will we get to a position where 80% of the population are fully vaccinated? I also have concerns about the implementation and policing of this legislation. Will it actually be put into practice on the ground as envisaged by the Government?

I have already referred to the issue of private businesses holding private personal medical information. A few years ago when the Government was talking about bringing in the public services card, many NGOs did not want Government agencies to share information they already held and which people had given freely. However, none of those NGOs seem to have expressed any concern about the obvious potential difficulty of this Bill, which is that third parties will hold private information on people. How is that information to be held? This legislation will place individual restaurant owners or bar owners in a highly invidious position. It is not a position in which they wish to be, to be frank. I also have concerns about the use of a travel document for purposes other than travel, which is what we are enshrining into legislation if this Bill becomes law.

I have grave concerns about the fact that here we are here again in the last week of the Dáil term. This is my 20th summer in Leinster House - or in the convention centre - and it has often been the case that serious legislation is discussed rather quickly in the last week of the House sitting. That is not a good way to do business. I acknowledge that this legislation does allow testing to be used as an alternative to the vaccine passport and I thank the Minister and his officials, the Tánaiste, and others such as the party Whips for ensuring that is the case.

I have two principal requests. I ask the Minister to give some statement of what the target is for the introduction of antigen testing or PCR testing, to which Deputy Shortall referred earlier. Some people might have taken PCR tests for other purposes. What is the aim for when those who undergo tests will be able to use them as an alternative to a vaccine passport to have their lunch or a drink indoors? The Minister might be able to accede to my second request. Once the Dáil returns in September, I firmly believe this legislation should be up for debate as item number one, or certainly on the first day the Dáil comes back. I am aware that the legislation has a timeframe of three months but I do not see any reason why, having had it on the Statute Book for the bones of two months at that point, we cannot debate it then rather than wait until the last minute in October to see whether it should be reviewed, changed or - hopefully not - extended.

I spoke briefly about the obvious contradictions earlier. Currently, if someone goes to a hotel and is a resident he or she can eat in the dining room but if not, he or she cannot. This legislation will allow people who have a vaccine passport to dine indoors in those locations. I am uneasy about the fact that up until now people who have had much less by way of evidence to show they are not carrying the virus have been able to use some of those facilities. I am also concerned by the fact that the legislation exempts people under 18 because people aged 16 to 24 are those who are the most infectious. I am conscious of the fact that as we speak, 783 new cases have been declared for today, which is the highest number since 20 February. Thankfully, the number of hospitalisations and ICU occupations are still low at 72 and 20, respectively, but we need to keep those figures firmly not just in the back but in the front of our mind. The core figures are the numbers of people in hospital and in ICU. Thankfully, those figures still remain low.

I am also conscious that in the Supreme Court judgment of Brennan v. Attorney General in 1983, an allowance was made that groups could be treated differently for legitimate legislative purposes once the different treatment is related to the purpose of the legislation and each class is treated fairly. By that test, this Bill probably is constitutional but I still have grave reservations about it. I ask the Minister to indicate to the House when he believes the testing alternative to the vaccine passport will be available. He should make that happen as soon as possible.

See this speech in context