David Norris (Independent)

I will not rehearse the argument on the Order of Business, but a profound disservice has been done to democracy in Ireland by the Minister and his advisers. One of the most significant and courageous speeches that I have heard in the House was given today by Senator Mansergh. He represents the decent conscience of Fianna Fáil, and I honour him for it. He laid it on the line and said clearly that the argument for delaying Committee Stage is unanswerable, and so it is. It is shameful that we should be treated in this manner.

There is no question or doubt that my colleagues are right about the issue of significant mental disability. It is hypocritical of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, to introduce this when we saw him posing with Down's syndrome children at the Special Olympics. Where has all that spirit gone? There are provisions about people causing damage to themselves or others. Autistic children are certainly in that category, as are victims of epilepsy. This is a bad and shameful day for democracy in this State, redeemed somewhat by Senator Mansergh who broke the silence on the other side of the House. It is clear that members of Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats are embarrassed by this legislation, as they made clear when I spoke to them in the ante-chamber. It is a pity that they may not act on their concerns.

Like others, I have received some material from different briefing organisations — people professionally, directly and legally involved in the area. They say that they have had only two days to work on it and will have amendments for us by Monday. Unfortunately, that is of no use.

Much of the Bill simply re-enacts the provisions of the Aliens Order 1946. However, we ought to bear in mind that not only is that fairly antiquated legislation, it was enacted just after the Second World War and before the international bill of rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Compliance with human rights law simply cannot be taken for granted, since it has never been tested. It needs rigorous scrutiny, something the Bill deliberately avoids. For example, the ECHR requires that restrictions on fundamental rights, such as to privacy or correspondence, must be necessary in a democratic society, have a legitimate aim and be proportionate to the aim pursued. Can one say that of the requirement, which carries a criminal penalty for non-compliance, to declare all written materials? It is not even practical. Does it include shopping lists, telephone numbers, address books, newspapers and magazines? The penalties for non-compliance are fairly strong. Would it not be better to insert a proviso of reasonability, such as, "where reasonably suspected to be relevant to national security"? As worded, it will create a blanket or portmanteau situation.

It will come as a surprise to many people on both sides of the House who may employ non-nationals that, under section 8(4), an Irish person who has a non-national person staying can be imprisoned for up to a year or fined €3,000. Section 12 requires the production of identity documents on demand at any time. Where is the reasonability in that? Section 2(2) lists certain laws and instruments in the Bill from which one should not derogate. There is no mention whatever of Ireland's international human rights obligations and in particular the European Convention on Human Rights. Where is the reference to it in the Bill? It is worrying.

Amnesty International, in particular, has expressed its concern, not just at the original provisions, but at the Minister's clarification, issued to The Irish Times, that the phrase "mental disorder" also refers to profound mental disturbance such as psychopathic behaviour. I agree with the view of Amnesty International that this displays an inaccurate and outdated impression of mental illness.

There are no provisions for the victims of trafficking in the Bill. The Irish Refugee Council has grave reservations, feeling that it contains discriminatory and retrospective provisions in violation of international law which, if passed, would be detrimental to developing an effective managed immigration policy in Ireland. That is the view of those working at the coal face. They feel that the Bill ought to be withdrawn, with the Government introducing temporary emergency legislation in its place. I am sure that the Minister did not use that phrase in his speech. It was left to Senator Jim Walsh, who, acting on a hint suggested this.