Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will try to be brief, given that every Bill today is being rushed through all Stages. They will all have been guillotined before a full debate could happen, even in the compressed form of debate that has been allowed when Bills are pushed through all Stages. There will have been five guillotines in two days. These practices, as Senator Hoey noted, are not just disrespectful but damaging to democracy. The Minister of State, along with Ministers or other Ministers of State who appear before the House later, may plead the defence of "certain emergency circumstances". The problem, however, is that a similar approach, of railroading past Stages, of assuming there is nothing to be learned from the Opposition benches about the quality of legislation, and of non-meaningful engagement, has been applied throughout the past few months, not simply this week. Numerous Bills have been either pushed through all Stages or pushed through a combination of Committee and Report Stages. That is a real concern. This week, the guillotine has returned and is being used on five Bills.

It is bad for democracy when legislation is rushed in this way and the Stages of legislative scrutiny are skipped, but it is also really bad for the legislation in question. Senator McDowell pointed out just some of the problems with the Bill. Definitions that do not match up to how the powers are meant to work, for example, are exactly the kind of problem that can be fixed if there is a gap between Committee and Report Stages. That is exactly what the gap is for. It is not about scoring points but creating better legislation. Doing otherwise is a serious concern.

On the question of additional powers, they are not something the Garda has called for. The Policing Authority has been clear that this is not what it sought. The Garda Commissioner stated that if there were to be fines for breaches, the directions to the public and Garda members would need to be crystal clear. They are not crystal clear; they are muddy, ambiguous and there are areas for interpretation or where it is not clear who is liable. They are concerns. As I stated to the Minister of State's colleague in the Department of Health when she appeared before the House, we need to be clear about the failures in engaging and dealing with the Covid crisis thus far. There have been some areas of success but others of failure and shortfall. The latter have not been through a lack of powers but through failures in policy. They have been in cases where there has been either the wrong policy or where the right policy has been wrongly implemented. We were told we needed to rush through the powers to ensure that pubs would close. I do not know to what extent that legislation was used. Have there been numerous cases where the Garda has been able to use those powers and where, otherwise, pubs could have said "Go away." and kept going? I do not know, but the number of Covid cases has continued to increase and the measures granted at that time have not significantly contributed in a way that we can quantify, although if there is evidence of that, it might be useful.

Now the Government is seeking new powers and I have tabled a number of amendments in respect of them. One of the fundamental points, which I have made in a few amendments, is that there is a public duty to equality in human rights. Within that, there is a duty in respect of non-discrimination. It does not give me confidence that the Government is moving through the legislative Stages in this House with such speed. There is a further duty of the Department to ensure that any regulations or fines made under the legislation will be proofed to ensure they are considerate and mindful of the public duty to equality and the public obligations to human rights. Has that been addressed?

Senator McDowell pointed out some flaws and gaps in the Bill in regard to definitions. I am also concerned about the section that specifies how fines might be given to those who a garda believes may be about to go to a party. The language is in a future tense - that such persons be about to go to a party or about to enter a premises. The garda may give a direction and the fine is for not complying with that garda's direction, but there is a concern because that is very ambiguous. It again shows a certain mindset in creating these solutions where the legislators imagine that everyone lives in houses. In an apartment building, someone may just be going to his or her apartment. If a garda then directs the person to leave the area and the person says he or she just wants to go home, and if the garda's direction is wrong, the person's non-compliance with it may leave him or her open to a €1,000 fine. It will not be crystal clear if that is the standard.

I recognise that measures need to be taken, although I do not believe that these are the key ones. There may be some merit to the regulations but the fundamental problem is that the period lasting until June is excessive. If we are able to give only six weeks' protection in respect of evictions, surely we need a similarly cautious approach when giving the authorities the kinds of sweeping powers in the Bill.