To follow up on a point made by an earlier speaker, we need to do this but the wording should be better. We have been waiting for it for a long time and it has been coming for a long time. I started campaigning for this change in the Constitution long before I entered the Oireachtas. It has been campaigned for and pushed for a very long time. During that journey, the understanding of what we want to have in the Constitution has been evolving. There was a conversation about straight deletion. I always favoured havin…

I thank the Minister. It is good that hopefully before the referendum we should have the result of the roadmap and dates for the optional protocol. That would be something very substantial that would send a really positive signal. I look forward to the outcome in the next number of weeks. Perhaps this might accelerate it. The Minister mentioned a number of areas in which the State needs to show its sincerity and show the spirit in which it is carrying this forward with “shall strive to support the provision of care…

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I am delighted to rise on behalf of all my colleagues in the Civil Engagement Group to pay tribute to our colleague and friend, Senator David Norris. There has been some discussion of his extraordinary achievements, such as his landmark case on the decriminalisation of homosexuality. Something I think is really important was his battle to establish the Oireachtas foreign affairs committee, to make sure there was a strong Oireachtas voice in the world.

Yes, exactly, with other representatives at the time. I was thinking about how to capture a sense of what an extraordinary honour it has been to serve in the Seanad alongside Senator Norris. I thought of the legacy and the extraordinary heritage work he has done, along with the work he has done in dragging and pushing Ireland to be a more just, equal and modern place that reflects more of its citizens and deserves its citizens. He is also a champion of what Joyce called the endless present. There is a line in Ulyss…

I will pick up where Senator Sherlock left off. It is important to emphasise that there is no change to the definition of marriage in this proposal. It does nothing to change the definition of marriage. The language, that the State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of marriage and to protect it against attack, will still be there. Regarding some of the language on marriage, we can lose sight of the key part of the referendum, which is about the family. Marriage is a commitment between two pe…

I will begin with one word that relates and will relate to this. I will comment on the question of family. I find quite extraordinary the idea that marriage is considered valuable only if other people's families are not recognised. That is what is being talked about here. Being very clear, there is no change to the definition of "marriage" in any of what has been proposed. It reminds me a little of the marriage equality referendum campaign, when there were people saying their marriages would be somehow less valuabl…

I come to this Bill now because what I have said relates to one of the aspects of the article we are discussing. It should be borne in mind that the clauses in it applied only to the family, so if there were any positive social policy implications at all, they applied only to women who were married. There was nothing for one-parent families in any of the social policy measures we have or have not had in this State. There are a few elements in this clause. I was strongly against a straight removal and argued very st…

I join Senators in thanking Thomas Hickey for all he has done to make this institution run as it does. I wish him every happiness and enjoyment in his retirement. I know that Senator Black will thank everybody else who must be thanked and who make this institution possible. I am happy and honoured to continue to serve here and to be back. Last night, I was lying awake between about 3 a.m. and 5 a.m., which is something I do a lot now. I was thinking about love and suffering and the love and suffering of all those i…

With respect, they are quite different things. It is one thing to say that a person is driving in a manner which is dangerous or likely to be dangerous because that is an action which is taking place. We are talking about a vehicle. Legislation is a reasonable place to have that point because if people are driving in a manner which may prove to be dangerous, such as driving all over the road or, if persons were there, would be likely to be dangerous, that is an action that is already under way. The Minister has com…

Again, I would say that where it has been used, we will not have an objection to that-----

Of course.

I move amendment No. 7: In page 47, line 27, after “bicycle” to insert “, or cargo bicycle,”. This suite of amendments simply seeks to include explicit reference in the Bill to pedal cargo bikes. There was some back and forth with the Minister on this issue during the Committee Stage debate. The placement of these four amendments varies slightly from that of the amendments we tabled on Committee Stage because the Minister expressed concern around the placement of our amendments and the relevant section. We have tak…

We have the concern in terms of how it is interpreted. At this point, we will need to go with the Minister's interpretation. However, I note that perhaps it is important that very clear signals are sent to accompany the roll-out of cargo bikes and that they are covered, if not by the provisions we have suggested, then by the Minister's message that he believes and is confident that they are covered. I know this is a concern that those looking to use cargo bikes have, namely, whether they have that proper protection…

I move amendment No. 8: In page 47, line 29, after “bicycle” to insert “, or cargo bicycle,”.

I move amendment No. 9: In page 48, line 2, after “tricycle” to insert “, or cargo tricycle,”.

I move amendment No. 10: In page 48, line 4, after “tricycle” to insert “, or cargo tricycle,”.

I move amendment No. 11: In page 58, lines 34 and 35, to delete “and other data-gathering devices”.

This is a large grouping and it is good to have clarity on which amendments are being taken together so I can cover them all. Amendments Nos. 11, 16 and 29 attempt to delete references which the Minister inserted on Committee Stage to “other data-gathering devices”. We made very clear arguments against the inclusion of this wording on Committee Stage. The wording is far too open-ended and essentially permits the use of any surveillance technology to be employed on our roads without restriction. We have cautioned th…

I acknowledge that there has been some movement from the Minister compared to Committee Stage. It is some assurance with regard to the processes we outlined and the ambiguity about whether there would be any clear regulations around the data obtained using cameras or other data gathering devices. As I understand it, the Minister is committing, through a later amendment, to making adjustments to the new section 77A(6) to ensure there will be regulations in that respect. That is something. However, the concern about …

We might come to them later. They relate to the same issue and, therefore, that is why I have commented on them. They relate to the question of what the regulations might be. With respect to the Minister, I am also conscious that there will be different Ministers in the future who will produce regulations. There is always a pressure towards greater and greater surveillance within our public spaces. We have seen the consequences of that, as I said, in many parts of the world. We do not actually have to look to China…