Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am just looking at him; I am speaking to the Acting Chair. He is a beauty to behold, no more than myself.

I accept the argument but my point is simply this: on balance, it is dangerous to go tiering victims and it is best left to courts to make rulings in sentencing having regard to all of the circumstances in the case of an offence, including a hatred motivation. I should be allowed to say that without being demonised by Senator Ward, Senator Flynn or others. The more strident and dogmatic they are in insisting that people like me have come out from under a rock, the more the listening public hears people who are simply ad hominem in their arguments, as opposed to people who are honestly grappling with the issues. I would have a lot more respect if Senator Ward said that he sees my point of view but thinks I am mistaken because of X, Y or Z. On the suggestion of reassuring me that I will be able to "continue to be offensive", I would be horrified to think that I was ever deliberately or even accidentally offensive. I do not think that kind of trademark, old-style, political jibing is what is called for as we scrutinise this legislation. There is no need for it. Disagree with me all you will and show me why you think I am wrong but do not suggest that I am looking for an excuse to be offensive. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I believe there is an element of sleight of hand on the part of the Government - I point at no person - in maintaining this new definition of "gender", which is without precedent. I would say there is no reason to do that. I will point out to the Minister in a moment why the victim of crimes legislation in 2017 gets it right. It refers to "gender", which relates to the objective situation of whether a person is male or female, including a person who is male but who has elected under the 2015 legislation to be designated as female, and to the more subjective reality that is a person's perception of their own "gender identity or expression". I do not see how Senators Flynn or Ward can have a problem. I may be concerned about this kind of tiering of victims in the context of hate crimes, as I see it, but I have said that I will live with it. I do not see how anybody can have a problem with what I am saying, which is that the hatred that underlies an act making it into a more serious crime should or could refer to characteristics of the victim, including their age, communications difficulties, colour, disability, family connections, health, nationality, national status, gender, gender identity or expression, ethnicity, political views or affiliation, religion, race, sex characteristics or sexual orientation. I am the one who is being inclusive here. You guys are the ones who are being exclusive by forcing people to take on board that gender no longer means a male or female, and also by excluding certain categories of people from protection. I put it to the Senators again: if a child is attacked because they are a member of a political family-----