Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

It has come home to me again today how alive and well religion is in Ireland. It is evident because two of the most animated discussions we have had here dealt with religion. The main issue, however, was the sale of mass cards in shops. We were all approached by several people about this practice and many Senators have raised the matter in the House. We also discussed misrepresentation whereby an individual or group dishonestly claims to represent a charity, and obviously something had to be done about that. One of the most blatant cases concerns clothes, and we have seen that happening throughout the country. A leaflet may be dropped through the letter-box indicating that clothes will be collected for a charity. Subsequently, however, we discovered that this was not the case. In some cases that representation is given but only a small proportion of the money collected goes to a charity, while the main proportion is for commercial purposes. It is one of the reasons this Bill is focused on ensuring that we are dealing with genuine charities.

Since Senator Bacik's election to the House, I have found the discussions to be exceptionally good. It is good to hear other views being put forward. Perhaps I am not supposed to refer to another Member, but I only knew of Senator Bacik through the media prior to her election. When she makes a point here, however, it gives the Government side an opportunity to respond and that is what parliamentary debate is all about. We have had that on the Order of Business nearly every day and I would like to see it continue because we must all be open to learning. On the other hand, Senator Mullen has given us an exceptionally good background on the issue.

Let us come down to the facts. We accept that masses relate to the Catholic church, which is the starting point. Given that that is the case, if one is looking for a governing or representative group, it must be the Catholic church in this case. I am not sure whether this issue comes under the heading of charity, but it does not relate to money alone. Nonetheless, we should never underestimate the importance of a mass card in helping bereaved people to grieve for a loved one. I have repeatedly heard people say that they never realised they had so many friends until the mass cards arrived. There may be a theological weakness in that argument, but it does not take away from the positive effect of mass cards. It is important to maintain the status of such cards, which cannot be the case if it is the same as buying a lollipop. Generally, there is an unusual signature on bogus mass cards, which seems like Arabic, and therefore when people receive them they know that the same sentiment and concern were not involved. They will also know that one did not go to the same trouble to have a mass said for the deceased person.

Knowing that a scam was involved, the Minister could have outlawed that practice completely. If he had done so, we would have had a wider debate here because we would have read all kinds of connotations into such an extreme measure. The balance that he has introduced in the legislation is like the wisdom of Solomon. On the one hand, the law does not come down like a ton of bricks on a "genuine" purveyor of these mass cards. Second, the Bill places a responsibility on that person to prove the cards are legitimate because we know there are scams.

One could not possibly take the Catholic church out of the equation. The mass relates solely to the Catholic church so surely it is entitled to maintain its credibility. Senator Mullen put his finger on it when he said that members of the church are citizens of this country as well. They have a representative group called the Catholic church. Would we treat a trade union any differently, for instance? Would we have dealt any differently with the representative organisations concerning this Bill? We would not have done so. Incidentally, the Catholic church still represents a majority in this country. One can become over politically correct on these issues and think one is helping some minority, but, in the main I do not always see those minorities.

I have cited an example, which is going slightly away from the amendment, that when people were demanding that the Angelus should be taken off RTE, it was a Church of Ireland bishop who defended it, not a Catholic one. He asked, quite rightly, what was wrong with reflecting for a couple of minutes each day in a spiritual context. The same applies here because there is so much badness, violence, division and acrimony out there. If religion can help people to focus, cultivate a conscience, help others, be neighbourly and promote peace, surely to God that is vital, and if the mass card is an instrument of that process, we should ensure that it is not undermined, misrepresented or fraudulent.