Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)

I fully understand the intentions behind the amendment, but the proposed amendment would involve a change in section 20(1)(d). That subsection is designed to prosecute offences relating to the use of a false passport as evidence of citizenship or identity. The maximum penalty on conviction is an unlimited fine and up to ten years' imprisonment.

Section 20(2) provides for a lesser offence involving the use of another person's passport to gain entry to a pub or club. This reflects the reality that a passport is increasingly regarded as the principal and most secure form of identification and frequently used to provide evidence of age for access to pubs and clubs. On occasion, a young person will seek to use another person's passport, usually that of a relative or friend, to gain entry to a pub or club. While this is correctly defined as an offence under subsection (2), it is a lesser offence and the penalty is tailored accordingly, with a maximum penalty of a fine not exceeding €500.

There is a significant difference between the two offences. Section 20(1)(d) involves the use of a false passport, whereas section 20(2) involves the use of another person's passport in particular and limited circumstances. The proposed amendment seeks to ensure that a person using a false passport to gain entry to a pub or club would not face the possibility of an unlimited fine or imprisonment. While it would not be the Government's intention that a young person presenting a false passport to enter a pub or club should face the maximum penalty, interference with or falsification of a passport for any purpose is an activity which cannot be condoned and it is important that provision remains to be prosecuted for such offences. The proposed amendment would create a loophole whereby a person falsifying and using a passport could plead that this had been done to gain entry to a licensed premises or club. As section 20(2) relates only to use by a person of a passport not issued to him or her, such a person might argue that he or she was not caught by any offence in relation to the use of the falsified passport. We must retain the power to prosecute all offences arising from the use of false passports and cannot risk introducing a loophole.

I am confident the Director of Public Prosecutions will take the circumstances and gravity of the offence into account in the normal manner in deciding whether and on what basis to prosecute and, if a person is convicted, on the penalty to be imposed. While I appreciate and agree with the intentions behind the amendment, I do not consider that it should be approved.