John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan. I wish to be brief, but a couple of important issues arise. In his introductory speech, the Minister of State referred to the State's responsibility and duty of care to its citizens. Citizens have rights non-citizens do not share, which is as it should be. The State has a duty to protect itself and its citizens. The question then arises as to how it can do this effectively.

It is indisputable that legislation must be brought forward to deal with the lacuna created by the High Court decision. There is also an urgency about this matter because, in the absence of the legislation, there is potential for serious abuse to occur with regard to non-nationals entering the State.

As the explanatory memorandum states, the changes are minimal. However, I was appalled when I read the reference to disability in section 4(3)(c). If I have stood for anything since I became a Member of the House, it is the rights of people with disability. I hope I have made some small contribution to the advances that have occurred in the past 14 years.

I could not have supported the Bill if the word "disability" had remained in the Bill as circulated to us. However, I accept there are situations where people may present in a violent and disturbed state and discretion needs to be given to officers at ports and airports to deal with this. The Government amendment, which was quite rightly brought forward, deals with this. This right is restrictive and will be used with the proper discretion. If somebody who was deeply disturbed entered the State and committed a murder, the Government would be rightly held accountable in that situation. There would be a furore about it. There must be balance and what has emerged by way of Government amendment achieves this.