Niall Ó Donnghaile (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome our visitors to the Public Gallery who are here to listen to the debate on the Bill. I commend and support those in the Labour Party group who proposed the Bill. Sinn Féin will support the passage of the Bill on Second Stage.

Like a number of previous speakers, we in Sinn Féin opposed the 2004 referendum. Over the past number of years, we have begun to see the toxic outworking, which many of us alerted the then Government to, and the very negative ramifications of the race to the bottom in 2004 which, as Senator Ó Ríordáin stated, resulted, tragically and shamefully, in the race card being put front and centre of political life in the State. It is not just a stain on the politics of the State but unfortunately for many people it is coming home to roost in the most negative way.

I am disappointed by the Government's stance if it is the case it will oppose the Bill. It is not normally the custom in the House to oppose legislation like this on Second Stage. Senator Conway alerted us to the potential for legal concerns around it although I am not sure how credible that is. Even if it is, we tend to work collaboratively and positively together to try to get legislation through.

At its heart this is about cherishing, protecting and defending children who are born here when their families come to live in Ireland. I do not want to attack Senator Conway but it is worth putting on the record that I fundamentally disagree with him on the Government's record on direct provision and support for vulnerable migrant families, and children in particular. The points have been made. There is no point in getting into a ding-dong around that. The Bill does not overturn the 2004 referendum although in many ways I wish it did because it was a stinking vote and is a blot on the Constitution and the political and social structure of the State. I am delighted that the vast number of us in the Chamber are alert to that and ready to stand up and argue against it even now.

I will briefly refer to the positives I see in the Bill. It is about protecting Irish children, that is children who are born of this nation. It utilises the language of the Good Friday Agreement which is always a positive thing. It is as succinct as it can be, which we do not always get when it comes to legislation in the House. It seeks to do exactly what it says on the tin.

While the Bill is succinct, the complexities of the citizenship issue are not so succinct. They are a live and intrusive problem in many instances in countless people's lives right across all of the Thirty-two Counties. I happen to be of the view that creating citizens is positive and progressive. The more we seek to grant citizenship and empower Irish citizens it will benefit us and stand us in good stead in the long run. These children who are born here are as Irish as us and we are as Irish as they are. We should enact ways that cherish them in a much more proactive and accessible way.

I have a number of questions on the outworking of the legislation in terms of its application and its reference to Good Friday Agreement language such as "the island of Ireland". I engage with many families, for example Lithuanian families in Dungannon who are perhaps working in food production, whose children attend the local Gaelscoil. They play for the local GAA club and identify as Irish, as they would. They want to avail of Irish citizenship in the same way as someone who comes to live in Galway, Cork or Dublin would.

It is the same in south Belfast where I had the privilege of visiting the Belfast Polish school, which is a Saturday school in the city, when I was Lord Mayor. I met with one child who was attending the local Gaelscoil. She was speaking Irish at the Gaelscoil, Polish at home with her mother, Russian at home with her father and English out on the street with the children she played with. In the midst of all that enriching diversity and the benefits the child will inevitably have, she identified as Irish and wanted to avail of Irish citizenship. Perhaps, in the spirit and the word and letter of the Good Friday Agreement, the benefits of the proposed legislation will apply right across the Thirty-two Counties.

I do not know how much time I have left but I will make my final point. We need to look at the broader issue of citizenship because we have instances in the North - I do not want to digress to much from discussing what the Bill seeks to do - where people who identify as Irish, and are Irish under the Good Friday Agreement, are being taken through the courts by the British Home Office for trying to assert their Irish citizenship in line with the Good Friday Agreement. When they apply to the British Home Office for residency visas for their partner or spouse from the US, they have to renounce British citizenship that they have never held. It is obviously in breach of the Good Friday Agreement and is being tested in the court at present. We need to be careful we do not treat people who were born here and have lived here for a long time differently from others or that we act as if there is some kind of second class or substandard form of citizenship. Perhaps it is a debate for another day. I welcome the Bill. I support what the Bill seeks to do. I am disappointed and I hope at this late stage the Government will consider changing its mind.