David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 137:

In page 70, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:“(c) in section 26 in line one, after the word “penalised”, to insert “or threaten to penalise”.”.

The Minister of State has already spoken on this issue, but I am a little concerned that the Government seeks so narrowly to control the scope of the Bill. I believe it is within the remit of the House to extend the scope of the Bill somewhat. We have argued the toss on this. It is not only a matter of penalising. The threat to penalise also operates as a disincentive to people and for this reason I believe it should be covered. The Minister of State has said that the wording is correct and that it is in other legislation and so on, but it is not in this legislation and I believe it should be.This Bill goes beyond just the general regulations, procedures and so on. It deals with principles and issues. It seems extraordinary that the Minister of State would resist taking this on. If the Minister of State is providing for penalising, then threatening to penalise has the same effect. As the Minister of State is taking on penalising, that is actually in the Bill and we are not extending the scope of the Bill at all. It would not bother me if we were, but we are not. We are addressing a clear point, that it would be not only "penalising", which is in the Bill, but also the threat to penalise. If somebody comes along and says to an employer that if he or she does a particular thing, we will levy such-and-such in the way of sanctions, then that is an effective disincentive. It should be addressed in this Bill.

I will stick to this point, and I will return to it on Report Stage. It seems the Government is taking a narrow view. There is an utter reluctance to accept amendments from this House, and there is no need. Some of my colleagues said this was because the Bill has come from the Dáil and would have to go back to it with any amendments, but the Government amendments we are dealing with will have to go back anyway. There is no stumbling block. I appeal to the Minister to take this back urgently and decide not only to penalise but also to provide for a threat to penalise.