Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Some tightening may be needed here because there is vulnerability. As I said, the impact is not simply on the person who might face prosecution but on his or her whole family unit, and that is what needs to be protected here.

Again, as my colleague articulated it very clearly, the rationale originally for having the criteria of for profit or for financial benefit was because the original legislation and directives were seeking to create a balance. This balance the Minister of State is speaking about now is tilting it but we are at risk of tilting too far, whereas that balance was already there by having that financial criterion. We have not seen a lot of prosecutions, but we are told there is a perceived likely prosecutorial difficulty in engaging on the question of financial benefit.

Amendment No. 13 is quite nuanced in that it addresses the financial benefit and the object of people smuggling. That could also be caveated to include family member actions as well. I look forward to further engagement on this.

We need to send as precise and clear a signal to prosecutors as possible because, as my colleague has said, there is a fear and a perception. We know we have had cases, which we spoke about on Committee Stage. I have spoken about Médecins sans Frontières and there have been cases of Irish persons who have faced prosecution.

I will press the amendment. If the Minister of State cannot accept it at this point, I hope he might engage with us further between now and when the Bill goes to Dáil and maybe we can find forms of words which clarify.