Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Yes. I am just saying that other legislation was quietly parked without a word about it. That is only one area. We had significant public consultation and a huge effort by this Oireachtas to try to get that done. We are all happy when legislation is done and dusted. Maybe that is why we should have a review of all legislation. If it is not working because of the expense involved, what are we doing here making these laws? Do we have any idea about a cost-benefit analysis of this legislation, the cost to the State and, above all, who will police it?

The Minister heard Deputy Tóibín tell her that in some areas of her constituency this year there has been no detection of crime at all. Either it is a very safe place or there are no gardaí to do the job. The latter, I presume, is the case. Gardaí are in a bad situation, and it is awfully worrying to see only 20 duine in the college in Templemore. We had promises, and this is very relevant to the Bill in the context of enforcement. It is very worrying that we are not recruiting people. We used to have thousands. A taxi man picked me up here one night the week before last. He told me he tried six times in the 2000s to get into An Garda Síochána, and now we cannot fill the places. There is something radically wrong. We are not supporting our gardaí in the way we should. We are not remunerating them and it is not an attractive job any more. We know things have gone horrible, dangerous, nasty and pernicious in many ways. I support the Garda 100% and always have done, but we keep piling on this legislation and there is nobody there to implement it. It looks great but it is a total distraction from reality.

I have huge concerns about the Bill and I will not support it. Some in my group will not either. We have not made a group decision on it. We are Independents, as the House will know, but I certainly will not support the Bill. As I said, there are many areas of it that are unclear.

I listened intently to an Teachta Jim O'Callaghan because he is a legal brain and man of the law who understands legalities and technicalities a lot better than I do. With regard to the reference to a fine or term of imprisonment not exceeding two years, or both, the jails are full. Gardaí tell me that when they bring prisoners to the various prisons from the court in Clonmel, County Tipperary, they are sent home again the same evening. What are we doing? We need major reforms in the justice system. That gardaí must bring home prisoners who are charged and convicted is a farce. This is going on under the watch of the Minister.

Added to this, we have legislation introduced here that is half-baked, half-cooked and totally lacking in clarity. It is lovely and panders to certain parts of society but many in society have grown tired of all the legislation of this kind. Number one, it does not put bread and butter on the table, nor does it help anyone to get a job or pay the ESB bill.

The legislation could lead to someone facng a jail sentence of up to two years for having in his or her possession a book or magazine that contains material that is subjectively deemed by the State to incite hatred against another person. That is very loose and broad. It is subjective for any member of the Garda or member of the public to make a complaint. It is a dangerous place to go. I certainly do not believe the people want that. I do not want it, and many of the people I represent do not want it. We recently had a furore over a sermon given by a priest in Kerry who was quoting the Scriptures. Would he fall under this legislation? Would he be hauled off before the courts? This is a legitimate question. I am not saying anything about the rights and wrongs; he was quoting from the Scriptures, which have been around a lot longer than any of us.

Do Members of Dáil Eireann want to support such a far-reaching provision, which is anything but clear? Could it lead to someone carrying a book by a leading academic such as Jordan Peterson facing a period in prison? I believe it could. Simply by virtue of the contents of a book you are carrying, you could fall under the subjective provisions of this legislation, which the Minister is pushing through today.

I have never made an apology for campaigning on pro-life issues or to keep the eighth amendment. We are all in danger. We have noted the furore and hassle regarding people protesting. People protest in good faith. We must have the right to protest, obviously with respect for everybody. We can never take that away from the people. My advice to the Minister is to make haste slowly. What publications and materials will be on the banned list? Who will decide? Will we be back to cases such as that of Salman Rushdie? Will we have the valley of the squinting windows? Will we drive underground people who rightly have opinions and values they want to espouse and in accordance with which they want to bring up their families? The Department of Education is already totally overreaching into the education system, with the resistance to homeschooling and Tusla's involvement in bringing parents and guardians before the courts. People want to do what is right for their children, as we all do, but we cannot police families in their homes. I see this happening. In this regard, we have heard from Deputy Tóibín, in particular. I have heard about the matter from teachers, múinteoirí scoile, and they have said they are shocked at the contents of books. On page 11 of a maths book for national schoolchildren, there is material about sexuality. Something has gone really wrong. The pushing has gone way too far. There are many areas of legislation to be dealt with in the Minister's Department and manpower is required to follow up on them and review their impact. The preferred option here is simply to get the Bill through.

Let me refer to the definition of "hatred" in the Bill. The Bill states "hatred" means hatred against a person or group or persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their protected characteristics or any one of those characteristics. Again, is this meant as a definition? It fails miserably if so. It does not meet any bar. If the definition of "hatred" is not the only one, could the Minister please inform the Dáil where there is a clearer one? My researcher and I cannot find it. There are large areas of the Bill that are not clear. Words and intentions are included in the hope they will work away and give carte blancheto certain people to decide certain things.

Section 10 deals with creating new offences for preparing or possessing material likely to incite violence or hatred against persons. Whose thinking is this? It is totally subjective. Where is this going to stop? There are no clear definitions. An offence under the section shall be committed where a person prepares or possesses material that is likely to incite violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of their protected characteristics or any of those characteristics with a view to the material being communicated to the public or a section of the public, whether by himself or herself or another person. Therefore, many elements of this Bill are totally unclear.

Every person in this State deserves the protection of the law. All our newcomers and guests who come here, for whom we try to do the best we can, should be protected. I refer to the ones who come legally, not those who, according to a response to a parliamentary question I got from the Minister recently, come in with no paperwork from many countries. We have to have a way to deal differently with those who arrive in Dublin by plane with no paperwork. Our people, above all, deserve protection in their homes and businesses and on the streets. The Government is failing miserably to provide this. The Minister has quoted numbers to me. She met the deputation in Clonmel and they laid the matter out bare for her. They also told her about their fears that someone will be seriously harmed, or worse. That is a desperate situation in 2022.

The Government has been in power for so long and is meant to protect the people, but it is not doing so. Neither is the Garda Commissioner. I have raised this issue with him. I salute the members of the Garda but wish to state explicitly how perilous the situation is. We do not want to give information to people who might use it for something else. The Minister knows how bad the situation is, and she is camouflaging it. This is a total camouflage. Deputy McEntee is creating a total diversion instead of doing the duties she, as a public representative for her constituency and, more important, a Minister appointed by the Taoiseach to a very important Department and acclaimed by this House, is supposed to be doing to protect the people, and by churning out legislation like this.

I am opposed to it, and I will vote against it. We must return to dealing with legislation to look after people, that has served us well and not have people cowering and frightened in their home. Earlier, my colleague, Deputy Cahill, told us about a woman in a house outside Thurles, who was sleeping in the barn because she had been so violently assaulted and robbed and she was afraid they would come back again. Do we want that in a modern society? Meanwhile, we churn out all this legislation here that looks good and sounds good, but it is not even properly framed, nor does not contain proper definitions. I am fundamentally opposed to it.

See this speech in context