John Minihan (Progressive Democrats)

I welcome the Minister to the House to put through this important legislation. Events such as 11 September 2001 and the Madrid bombings left us all shocked and saddened as the full horror of a major terrorist act sank in. With the advent of global media coverage of events as they unfold, the terrorist market has widened. Not only can an atrocity now affect the terrorists' target, their victims and the wider community, but those removed by location can also be terrorised by viewing these events as they happen.

Having recovered from the initial shock of 11 September 2001, we entered a period of reflection. Traumatised by these events we asked ourselves why, what would be next and how would it end. President Bush referred to the first war of the 21st century. He vowed to rid the world of this evil. Countries lined up to offer support; some more willingly than others, some backing down from the initial offer of a carte blanche to conditional support. Western democracies were in turmoil as the scale of the task unfolded. This is a new war that has never been fought before. There is no direct enemy, no sovereign state to strike and none of the traditional conventions of war within which to work. It is a war that cannot succeed by stealth alone. It is a war in which not only the military have to partake but also politicians, economists, business people and the ordinary man in the street. In bringing forward this legislation we are playing our part.

What is a terrorist? Who are these people who kill civilians indiscriminately? Statistics show that they are mainly young males, but they have little else in common. Today's terrorists are as diverse as the nations from which they come. They can be highly educated or at the bottom of the socio-economic scale. Their goals range from the narrowly political, such as those of the IRA, to the wide-ranging, like the desire of al-Qaeda to halt the spread of western culture and promiscuity.

Sometimes different groups work together and there have been numerous summit meetings of terrorist groups. To wage a war on international terrorism requires a new set of principles for an effective strike and that means international co-operation to produce a charter to combat terrorism. I am glad we are playing our part in such a charter by enacting this legislation, which I enthusiastically welcome.

This legislation makes it incumbent on us to comply with counter-terrorism efforts against terrorist organisations and even against the states that support them. All states that carry out terrorist attacks, have attacks carried out on their behalf, or provide ideological, economic, military or operational support to terrorist organisations, must be identified and branded as sponsors of terrorism. This must include states that provide terrorists with safe havens and refuse to extradite them, as well as states that incite others to commit terrorist acts or to support terrorist activity.

Based on the above premise, the international community must declare an economic embargo on all such states and their economic interests, both private and public. A secondary boycott should be declared on states and companies that do not respect these sanctions. Terrorist organisations have infiltrated the western world. Some organisations are active and some have sleepers lying in wait for their day. In the interim they become part of the community they are about to terrorise, which could be for months or even years. The ultimate weapon is the neighbour one does not suspect as a suicide bomber.

It is not only these terrorists we should fear but all mutually supporting groups and organisations. They may have different goals and objectives but they have a common bond, which is to inflict terror in order to achieve their aims. Terrorist organisations breed off each other and that is their strength. No single organisation could survive without the finance, the weaponry, the technology and the training. They all help each other and that is what makes them the force they are. Greed among business people allows them make financial investments, or buy the equipment or expertise they require. There is often a degree of tolerance by society in accepting their cause as just, turning a blind eye, or supporting them in a tacit way. American citizens give great financial support to the IRA. Are they willing to give it up? Are they willing to address the support given to terrorist organisations by their own people ?

It is necessary to address the wrongs in our society that lead to the formation of terrorist organisations. We have to look at the causes behind them. Some are as a result of previous wars, some are due to religious differences and some are due to poverty and famine. We have to ask what we can do to address these wrongs. When President Bush states he will whip terrorism, he is being naive or political, or both. At best, he will destroy some terrorists, which may be a necessary consequence of 11 September 2001.

Terrorism is supported by a root network and while terrorism might be evil, the same cannot be said of this root network. This network consists of people who live with oppression, repression, poverty, hunger, despair and hopelessness. These are people desperate to survive. Hatred feeds the network of terrorism. We must address this side of the issue as well. It is also the case that some people play on these emotions to stir up feelings of hatred for their own personal gain, be it financial or ideological. They are the silent terrorists; the ones who use others and their issues for their own ends.

Recent events in our own country have resulted in the removal of the mask from some of our own terrorists. This is a mask that we have tolerated for far too long in an effort to bring peace to this island. We in Ireland have to ask ourselves many questions in this regard. Decommissioning and criminality are no longer an issue for the vast majority of the Irish people. It is no longer a grey area. If Sinn Féin representatives wish to become real democrats, they must face up to the responsibilities that go hand in glove with democracy. That includes decommissioning terrorist weaponry now, which does not mean selling it to a sister terrorist organisation but destroying it or handing it over to the authorities. The IRA must not only disarm, it must disband.

Are we willing to put our foot down now or will we continue a hypocritical rhetoric where one foot is at either side of the fence? There can be no further dilution of our democratic values. There can no longer be a tolerance of Sinn Féin's À la carte version of democracy and a two tier interpretation of what is and is not a criminal offence. The questions our political leaders and every citizen must ask themselves are: "Were the murders of Jean McConville and Jerry McCabe criminal acts? Was the Northern Bank robbery a criminal offence?" When we answer these questions, first, to ourselves and, second, as a society, we can fully remove the mask from Sinn Féin representatives and look them in the eye. The members of Sinn Féin have answered these questions; we know where they stand. We must reflect carefully on their responses as we proceed in enacting and supporting the legislation before the House today.

Yesterday, Deputy Ó Caoláin said he is against criminality in all its forms. That is great but there is one big problem. The language sounds right and appears to be the same language I am speaking but there are two completely different meanings. That is the problem this country has had for the last number of years. The language the members of Sinn Féin, the Irish people and the Government speak sounds the same but does not mean the same thing. The Sinn Féin definition of criminality and the citizen's definition of criminality are two vastly different interpretations. It is time we confronted this.

Unlike other people, I welcome recent events. I have been of the opinion for a number of months that in an effort to achieve a great prize we have allowed a dilution of our democratic values. We took our eye off the ball. It is time there was some straight talking. I commend the Taoiseach on his performance in the Dáil yesterday. He looked Sinn Féin Members in the eye, their mask removed, and said what had to be said in plain English. I compliment the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on his performance in recent months and on his insistence on drawing a line on the issue of criminality.

Some people accuse me of taking the easy option for continually criticising Sinn Féin and for not having the political vision of something bigger. I have a political vision. I love this State; I am a citizen of the State, as are my children, and I know the type of State I want it to be. I know the democracy I want. For that reason I will continue to address this issue until everyone is speaking a common language.

On a previous occasion in this House I asked Sinn Féin to convince me and people who share my views that its members are serious about democracy and, most important, the responsibilities of democracy. When Sinn Féin members recognise and support the institutions of this State, like any law abiding citizen, they will be accepting their democratic responsibility. However, when Sinn Féin Members of these Houses publicly state that they would not encourage their supporters to talk to representatives of the institutions of this State if they had evidence or information about a criminal act, what type of responsibility is that? That I not the State in which I wish to live.

We came close to witnessing one of the greatest con jobs on the Irish people. It was a great seduction. I thank those who held the line and stood up in the face of this threat to our democracy. Of course, we must continue to talk but we should be firm when talking. I also advocate a time for reflection. Some hard words have been spoken and they need to be taken on board. However, when we continue to talk, we must try to find a common language — not a language that sounds the same but one which has the same meaning. That is the key to advancing this process. There must be trust and sincerity.

If Sinn Féin members come forward with a sincere, honest and up front approach to the future negotiations on Northern Ireland, the process will advance. They will be met with equal sincerity by both Governments and it will be possible to move the process forward to the resolution the people on this island want. However, there has been an awakening of the Irish people in recent weeks. They are saying they will go so far but no further. In that regard, the State has been done a service.

The legislation before the House is necessary. We should not fear it. Passing this legislation is, unfortunately, the price we must pay for the terrorism that grips the world today. There must be co-operation. We must break the chains of co-operation between terrorist organisations. That is their economy, it is what they live on. While some might be concerned about people's liberties and so forth, the security of the State, its people and of the world must be the primary objective when putting forward legislation such as this. I welcome the Bill and I compliment the Minister and his officials on its preparation.