Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I support the tenor of the Bill and compliment Senators Morrissey and Brennan on presenting it to the House. We are fortunate that a number of Private Members' Bills have come before the House in recent times. This is a tribute to Members and the work they put into preparing Bills on matters of import.

I was watching the debate on the monitor and noticed how Opposition Members were getting exercised about what goes on in the other House. The work that goes on in the Dáil should stay there and should not be debated here. There is no need for that. What we do stands on its merits. In general, courtesy is shown to us and I have not heard any great criticism in the lower House of what goes on here.

The Bill is important for many reasons. Senator Morrissey outlined the high profile case which underlines many aspects of it and alluded to the sad consequences for all parties involved in that case, which was a tragedy for those involved, for the area and for the family that lost a father. It is important that the law recognises the right of people to take reasonable and proportionate defensive measures for themselves and their families. However, if people overreact, they must be held to account. Among a small section of the community there is total disregard for the rights of other people, their property, their lives and safety. When I was growing up it was traditionally held that a man's home was his castle and that if anybody trespassed with malicious intent or hit somebody on his own property, it was far more serious than if it happened in public areas. There is much common sense to that approach. As a consequence, I welcome much that is in the Bill.

The Minister said the Government intends bringing forward more comprehensive legislation that will embrace these issues and he should be complimented on that. It is easy for the Opposition to be critical when it does not have to deliver anything other than criticism. Opposition Members are like hurlers on the ditch and their comments are generally retrospective. The benefit of hindsight is great.

Senator Kett alluded to and complimented Senator Morrissey on a particular aspect of the Bill, namely, that its provisions would also be taken into account in civil cases. This is relevant considering how litigious society has become. For example, in a case in the United States, an intruder getting through a skylight injured himself and subsequently brought a multi-million dollar claim against the owners of the property for compensation. This is a ludicrous situation. If a person perpetrates a crime on others, he or she must accept the consequences may be severe. The law should not be on the side of the perpetrator in civil cases no more than it should be in a criminal case.

I am sure that all sides of the House subscribe to the sentiments expressed in the Bill. The message must be made clear that people have rights. Prudence will dictate that people do not overreact. People realise that where a criminal element is involved an overreaction could have severe consequences. Reaction must be proportionate. The legislation must include provision that where a crime has been committed and the criminal subsequently finds himself before the courts, the victim's rights will be taken into account.

I compliment Senators Morrissey and Brennan on the Bill. It is a milestone for the Seanad to have a Bill that will not be opposed in the House.