John Dardis (Progressive Democrats)

However, I would understand if he did a runner at this stage. The Bill derives from the original Supreme Court case and the constitutional referendum in which the people gave an overwhelming endorsement of the policy now detailed in the Bill. In light of that overwhelming support, it must be supported by almost everybody in this House. I also commend the Minister for the courage he showed during the referendum campaign in enunciating clearly and calmly the issues involved and putting down some of the canards frequently peddled during that debate, which by and large was very reasoned. Thankfully it was not marked by some of the more extreme racist remarks we thought might emerge. It was a good reflection on Irish society in general. While obviously I do not want to reopen the issues raised during the referendum campaign, it was conducted in a good fashion and the outcome was clear.

We have come a long way since Enoch Powell spoke about the "rivers of blood". Society on both sides of the Irish Sea has advanced to the point where we tolerate people with different ethnic and racial complexions from our own and embrace them within our society. These standards are important irrespective of whether the person in the country is a citizen. There seems to be a presumption that citizenship accords a higher level of protection or responsibility with regard to how the State treats people, which is wrong, as I am sure the Minister is well aware. I am sure he and all other Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas would accord those protections to people coming to the country regardless of whether they are asylum seekers, economic migrants or whatever.

During the last general election campaign it was my experience that asylum seekers, economic migrants and even tourists were regarded as some homogeneous mass and no distinctions were made between them. Some people felt pejorative statements could be made irrespective of the nature of the reason for the person being in the country. It is obvious that some people must flee for their lives and the State has a responsibility to accord them sanctuary and give them due process, as it does. Thankfully some of the Jeremiahs and bogeymen during the campaign were proven wrong. I can recall the Minister having to correct a Member of the other House on the public airwaves when it was suggested that somebody could be left in mid-air, so to speak, without any citizenship, which is obviously wrong. While people might not always have the protection of the state from which they came, they are entitled to the citizenship of that state.

We also need to consider the effect of the Good Friday Agreement. It is frequently the case, as would be the experience of Members of the House, that something done with the best of intentions can have totally unexpected side effects. It was only after the Good Friday Agreement that people began coming to the country in numbers and the problem of people coming here to have a baby to accord citizenship to the child developed as an issue. It is appropriate for the Bill to address this aspect also.

I have some sympathy with remarks about people coming here to study. While I accept it would be wrong to use the short-term course as a way of circumventing the legislation, I have experience of a person who came from Hong Kong, completed all his secondary education here, went to university here, became a doctor and then returned to Hong Kong. When he came back to Ireland after China took over Hong Kong, if that is the correct phrase, it was very difficult to get citizenship for him, which I thought was wrong. Everything about the man indicated he knew very well what his responsibilities to this State were and all his education took place here. While I know the Minister has the power to make decisions in this regard, this area needs further consideration.

I am very glad that the passports for sale scheme has finished and I commend Senator Quinn on his work in that area. An element of hindsight applies to this matter. When one considers how desperately we needed inward investment, it was understandable by the lights of the time why such a scheme existed. The way the scheme was operated was not understandable or acceptable, which is a separate issue. Given the state of the economy today, the scheme is clearly no longer necessary even if it were desirable.

Responsibility for work permits lies with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. I have some sympathy for the remarks made by Senators Cummins and Norris regarding workers. Nevertheless this is a very difficult issue. While on the one hand nobody should be the property of an employer, which could derive from the way the system operates, against that checks and balances are needed. While on balance I would favour the worker getting the permit, I accept it could be difficult to operate in practice.

I know Deputy Jim O'Keeffe and Senator Cummins raised the issue of a helpline. It would be desirable for the Department to have a system whereby Members of the Oireachtas would have access. The provisions regarding the diplomatic service are good. The area of adoption is fraught. We have come from a position where most adopted children were of Irish parents to one where most adopted children come from outside the State. Obviously if adopted children have Irish parents they should be entitled to Irish citizenship. On balance I believe the Bill is good and I support it wholeheartedly.