Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

The L and O case highlighted the fact that those parents could not exploit a loophole, therefore, this referendum is not necessary. The Minister mentioned the Chen case. I do not know enough about that case to come back to him on it but we do not yet know the decision in that case. Should we hold a referendum in anticipation of a case that has not yet been decided? The only person who could exploit this is a child when he or she reaches adulthood, but that is not a bad thing. The Labour Party would be prepared to examine the issue, but in a definitive way. We should have a fully informed debate and then decide if a referendum is required, which was done in the case of the housing issue with the all-party committee.

We talked about America earlier. People have similar rights in America. The Minister said America has more stringent rules on citizenship but that is not necessarily bad in that it should not grant citizenship in the way we did in the past, when people literally bought citizenship. America has a comprehensive green card system, however, and the Labour Party has proposed such a system. The Minister said earlier that the Labour Party was not concentrating on the issue while he was working away on it. That is not true. We published a document, Ending the Chaos, which outlines a comprehensive green card system that the Minister has said he is considering introducing. That was even welcomed at the time by the bodies which support refugees.

We are not saying there should not be a system. The Minister is right when he says that if we have a proper immigration system it will combat racism. We are in favour of that. We do not believe there should be an open door policy or that this issue should be taken lightly. That is the reason we came up with a policy. We stand over that policy and that is the Labour Party position I will try to impart on the doorsteps.

I would have liked a more comprehensive examination of other alternatives. For example, when people talk about the X case, the Labour Party's position is that we should legislate within that and perhaps within the parameters of the decision on the L and O case and of the Chen case when it is made. That was an option but it appears not to have been considered.

I became very annoyed about this issue yesterday, as I am sure did many other people. It is something that is unlikely to happen to most people but if it did, it would be very upsetting for people to know that they had a constitutional right to something before this referendum and that we have taken it away through legislation. We know that it is wrong that they do not have that constitutional right if their parent died before their birth. Since that tragic thing has happened to them, they are denied constitutional rights, which are important. We would not have them if they were not so. It is dealt with by legislation, and I accept that the Minister said that. However, that is not the same as having a constitutional right. They have it now, but after this referendum, it will be taken away, and that is wrong.