David Norris (Independent)

I ask the Deputy Leader to provide for a debate on freedom of speech, particularly in light of the apparent proposals to introduce into law the offence of blasphemous libel. Unfortunately, I was in hospital and was not able to be in the House yesterday but I would have raised it had I been here. It is very important that we consider the issue.

Certain forces abroad are trying to get this done. The Vatican, in conjunction with the forces of Islamic fundamentalism, has been using international fora to try to establish an offence of defamation of religion, and this was rightly resisted by our international representatives. To find that the Government is acting in a contradictory way is very disturbing.

I was close to a case of blasphemous libel some years ago, which was very damaging, when Gay News was banned on foot of the publication of a poem by the late Professor James Kirkup. That had serious repercussions here as an entire edition was seized and other editions were subsequently seized. It was a serious infringement.

The matter of blasphemous libel and blasphemy was raised and dismissed by the Law Reform Commission in 1991. The Supreme Court decision in 1999 held the same way. I understand exactly how offensive these matters can be. That is why some weeks ago I raised the matter of a blasphemous performance in a Wexford nightclub where they re-enacted the Crucifixion. I felt that to be contemptible and I said so. The matter was taken up by the radio and other sources. As a result, not perhaps of my intervention but the popular moral disapproval, this was cancelled. That is the way to do it. God, if he or she exists, requires no defence from Irish law.

We would be far better off introducing civil partnership legislation and if we are looking for legislation to introduce we should achieve something we promised rather than kowtow. Where did this come from? I am a little disturbed to discover that sources close to one of the most reactionary religious-political groups here are circulating newsletters containing selectively edited highlights from these kinds of debate in Seanad Éireann. I deplore that and any Member of the House who co-operates with it as that is not freedom of speech either. That is the reason we need a debate on freedom of speech.