Mary Seery Kearney (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I rise to note a matter to this House and ask a question. Last Thursday, the journalist Hugh O'Connell had a story in the Irish Independentabout two joint committees. I will be careful, Cathaoirleach. The committees were obliged to waive privilege to allow members of the Garda in the north west access to their computers. That is in the context of a staff member of a Deputy being accused of viewing child abuse materials. The staff member is being investigated under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act. I am not saying anything about the case.I reiterate that the Deputy in question is not accused of any wrongdoing. However, there is a serious aspect, of concern within these Houses, that needs to be addressed and answered. Deputies and Senators, by virtue of their jobs, have access to delicate, private material. We have all been asked to advocate for people and their families. In the process, we are given material that discloses delicate, private matters and vulnerability. With Members and their staff having access to such information from members of the public, it is important for us to have robust systems to ensure the presumption of innocence is safeguarded at all times and that natural justice and fair procedures are accorded to the individual. Deputies and Senators have a duty to act to safeguard the public and their staff.

I ask the Deputy Leader to establish whether the individual in question has been suspended on full pay, pending the outcome of this investigation. What is the position and stance of that individual and the Deputy’s party on this matter? Has the party afforded support? How is the public being safeguarded? We are dealing with potentially serious child protection issues. It is important that Members of this House and the party of the individual have acted properly with regard to these issues.

Yesterday, during the Order of Business, a Member of this House tried to provide cover for incredibly ignorant statements made about people. Comments were made about parents of children born via surrogacy. Those comments are on the record of this House. The parents were reduced to being people who engage in contracts. That Member made a cynical attempt to claim that they were being criticised as being far right after saying something and says that the Member is just raising an objection. Nobody objects to anybody having a different opinion or to the advocacy of a different opinion. That is correct. I object to the labelling and prejudicing of individuals and the reducing of Travellers and people who advocate on behalf of Black Lives Matter. The language that we use is incredibly important. Having empathy for people in their situation is important, even if one disagrees with their point of view. Reducing the situation and cynically seeking cover in this House by saying that it does not matter how ignorant or aggressive statements are, and that people objecting to that person saying it are labelling him or her as far right, is not true and should be challenged on every occasion.