Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will take up the point Deputy Barry concluded with about social solidarity and us being in this together, which has been the hallmark of the national endeavour to date. We are skating on thin ice with regard to our capacity to maintain that social cohesion in the context of this legislation, about which I and a number of colleagues are particularly uncomfortable. I take some solace in the fact that the legislation is timelined. I echo the comments of previous speakers and ask the Minister to bring forward the date upon which this legislation will be reviewed to the date when the Dáil resumes after the recess. I make that point because the Minister might recalls that when we decided to defer the reopening, Dr. Tony Holohan said it was his view that there would be no reopening of hospitality until mid-September. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume on that date, which is similar to the date on which the Dáil returns, that we would have achieved something akin to herd immunity. Given the acceleration in vaccination, the involvement of pharmacies and the possibility of an additional 1 million vaccines being procured within the European Union, it would be appropriate, given the significance of this legislation, that we review its operation at the earliest possible date.

I will also ask a specific question. We were led to believe, by comments previously made by the Taoiseach, that there were constitutional issues upon which we would not trespass in the context of the direction in which we are now travelling. I would like reassurances from the Minister that those constitutional issues do not exist and that we are not taking a punt on the constitutionality of this legislation. Vaccination is voluntary but pitting the vaccinated against the unvaccinated is regrettable. On the basis that this is a short-term measure that will be reviewed at the earliest possible date, however, it is something I am prepared to support. I would like to be reassured that it will be reviewed at the earliest possible date. There is no specific use of the word "antigen" in the legislation but I would also like reassurance that we are looking seriously at antigen testing and PCR testing as an alternative to this approach. That would be important.

I have the utmost sympathy for businesses. Big and small businesses have all suffered. I am aware of the contribution that they and their employees make to local economies. They are desperate to reopen. This is about a measure that allows reopening. It is not about closing down, which everybody railed against. There is some great luxury for those in opposition who have the benefit of all the briefings but at the same time stand up in here day in, day out. I do not want to tar everybody with the same brush but I refer, in particular, to the flat-earthers who reject science and argue for reopening or whatever is popular on a given day. We are facing particular challenges with the Delta variant. Hopefully, we will not see the same correlation, as we did previously, between the level of hospitalisation and ICU admissions with this strain as we did with others. Vaccination is the key.

We are taking a significant step in a questionable direction. On that basis, I would like the Minister to give reassurances that this will be re-evaluated at the earliest possible date. It strikes me as patently obvious, given Dr. Holohan's previous commentary, that the early resumption of the Dáil in mid-September is the appropriate time to do that. By then, we will hopefully have antigen testing and PCR testing as an alternative. We are putting businesses in a difficult situation, particularly small, local community businesses that are perhaps not in the hotspots of tourism but are located in small local communities, which will be asking their local clientele for their vaccine status, so to speak. That is regrettable.

There are many other issues that arise regarding the precedents we are setting in the context of this legislation and the short-term approach relating to it. Who is responsible for policing the legislation? Is it bringing the legislative process into disrepute? As far as I can see from the content of the legislation, there will be no policing of it. It will, in fact, be quite unusual to see any policing of this legislation.

As I said, I am a reluctant supporter of the Bill. I understand why it is necessary. Had we embraced the antigen and PCR infrastructural issues earlier, it is possible that would have been the means to do it. I understand the resistance in certain quarters to antigen testing, but we are outliers in that regard in a European context. I urge the Minister to take on board the points I made, particularly regarding the constitutionality of what is proposed. We were led to believe by the Taoiseach that there were civil liberty issues, constitutional issues and legal impediments in the context of going down this road. I would like to be reassured that we are not being asked to trespass into an area in respect of which the courts may ultimately rule against the legislation.

See this speech in context