Gerald Nash (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank all the speakers who contributed to this important debate. Depending on how we progress, this could be considered a landmark evening for the Chamber. Much of what is positive about Irish politics, including the effects on the transformation of our society in recent decades, has emanated from legislative propositions that started their journeys in this House.

I am satisfied that the Minister of State is personally committed to advancing this legislation. Not only does he understand the principle of the legislation, but he fully endorses its ambition.

The Minister of State referred to the declaratory effect. He has got it in one. The Bill is declaratory by nature and by effect, and deliberately so.

I was involved in the campaign for an amnesty for members of the Defence Forces who deserted to fight with the British Army during the Second World War. These people were fighting the forces of fascism. It is a fascinating story and a fascinating period in our history. I worked with representative bodies, former soldiers, interests in the UK and the former Minister, Mr. Shatter, to resolve the matter.

We have examined the matter closely. We have examined the impact of the legislation in considering the approach we would take.

The Minister of State raised significant concerns relating to non-consensual acts. It was never the intention of this Bill that there would be an apology to or an exoneration of anyone involved in convictions pertaining to non-consensual acts. I trust the Minister of State accepts that. I know he and his officials will be available to address these issues. When we are drafting and crafting legislation, we have to be mindful of unintended consequences of particular provisions. That is why we have a robust legislative process. I am happy to work with the Minister of State on that. We have no difficulty in working with the Minister of State and officials to clarify the intentions of elements of the Bill. If the Minister of State believes it can be improved on the advice of the Attorney General, then we are open to suggestions.

I appeal to the Minister of State, given his good nature and his interest in this area, to ensure the Bill is not sent to the place where Bills are sent to die. I can never prevent myself from smiling somewhat at the phrase "new politics". One of the unintended consequences – perhaps it is intended – of new politics is that we are suddenly submerged with a high level and a large amount of legislation that has to go somewhere. Unfortunately, sometimes it is sent to committees to die.

I gather from the demeanour of the Minister of State and others that this legislation will go where it is required to go, that is, Committee Stage. The Minister of State could utilise an example involving Senator Bacik and me. Senator Bacik developed the Competition (Amendment) Bill last year. She worked closely with the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, and officials to get the legislation right to bring it to a point whereby it has gone through all stages in the Seanad. It will be in the Dáil shortly. I hope it will be law by summer.

I thank colleagues for their support for the legislation. At one point, the House was in danger of seeing peace breaking out. However, Senators Ruane and Buttimer put paid to that. I mean that in the best possible way. I thank all Senators for their support. I know Senator Buttimer is passionate about this entire agenda, as is everyone, including Senator Ruane. Senator Warfield referred to Uganda. We should be mindful of the fact that we can have such debates in the Chamber as well as debates on issues, policies and principles. We live in a democratic society. Unfortunately, that is not the case in Uganda and in many other countries. It is not only in Uganda where we can see how global winds in this area have been diminished. We need only look at the United States and Russia and the concerns of citizens in those places at the moment. They are concerned at the appalling vista in one of the world's largest, most significant and important democracies.

In recent years, we have had a good record of coming to terms with our past. For example, I was involved in setting up the Neary or symphysiotomy redress scheme. I was proud to be part of the Government that apologised to those who were victims of clerical sexual abuse. The Taoiseach performed a great service to the nation. One of his proudest days was the day he stood up in the Dáil to express his sorrow and to apologise on behalf of the people to those who were the victims of clerical sexual abuse.

The marriage equality referendum represented a landmark for us in terms of the country reaching adulthood. The adoption of legislation to provide for an apology to gay men who were criminalised by this society and to provide for an exoneration of those gay men would mark our maturity as a nation. I am keen for the Minister of State to consider that and to engage with us positively to move this legislation expeditiously through the process. Together, we can develop the legislation such that we can be proud to stand over it. It would send a strong message to those affected by the cruel laws that were on the Statue Book. The message is that these people did not have to live in the shadows, that the country now treats them as equal citizens and that we should never have treated them in the way we did.