Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I support this amendment. It is important that we have the data to inform us when it comes to questions about rolling over legislation. In the main, the Minister has had support where he has made a case for it, but there has been a terrible dearth of data on the implications of any of this legislation. It took quite a long time to get any information - for example, on the rate of enforcement and the numbers of prosecutions - and a breakdown of the detail. We need information in so many other areas. We cannot even get a list of consolidated regulations or statutory instruments. There is no cataloguing of measures the Government has introduced under the emergency legislation. That is bad practice. In most cases, the Minister has got a blank cheque with all the Covid legislation. There is great confusion over the regulations and a genuine lack of clarity. That is why we had the previous vote. With regard to rolling over the legislation, we should have the basic information.

The Minister said that, tonight, after this debate, he will sign new regulations and requirements for people travelling. They will need a PCR test within 72 hours of travel, or an antigen test. I raised this subject with the Minister this morning but he did not respond. I listened to his wrap-up. We have been hearing for the past 20 months that, when it comes to once-off tests and negative results, antigen tests are not reliable. We have been told that the whole time. We know that, when it comes to positive results, antigen tests are really reliable, in the order of 80% plus. A positive result is very reliable; a negative result is not at all reliable. Those of us who have been in favour of antigen tests have made it clear all the time that it is about having a screening tool. Antigen testing is a very useful screening tool. Now, inexplicably and suddenly, the Minister is saying that, to reduce risk from people travelling, it is fine to get a negative antigen test within 48-hour period. I find it hard to understand how that can in any way be meaningful. Professor Gerald Barry said on the radio this morning that it is really a box-ticking exercise.

The Minister confirmed that those who wish to go to, say, London for the weekend can get a PCR test done. That one PCR test will take them to London, where they may go clubbing, go to a match, take the tube and go to an airport to come back again. Again, it is pretty meaningless. It does not really provide any assurance of safety or reduce risk.

We have been making the point that the Government does things that are fairly meaningless and just amount to being able to tick a box to indicate we are doing something. It is hard to see how either of the measures that the Minister is going to sign into regulations this evening will make any difference to anything. They are certainly not going to reduce the risk of the importation of the virus. Can the Minister explain how it is that he is now saying it is acceptable that a negative once-off antigen-test result, which only tells one about a point in time and that is not reliable anyway, can mean anything or be of any use?

See this speech in context