I move: That leave be given by the Dáil to introduce the following Supplementary Estimates for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2024: Vote 4 — Central Statistics Office ( Supplementary Estimate ). Vote 5 — Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions ( Supplementary Estimate ). Vote 6 — Office of the Chief State Solicitor ( Supplementary Estimate ). Vote 9 — Office of the Revenue Commissioners ( Supplementary Estimate ). Vote 11 — Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery an…

I move: 1 . THAT section 112B of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (No. 39 of 1997), which contains provisions for the taxation treatment in respect of the granting of vouchers by an employer to an employee, be amended in the manner and to the extent specified in the Act giving effect to this Resolution. ————————————— 2 . THAT section 118 and Chapters 2A and 2D, of Part 30, of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (No. 39 of 1997), which relate to the general charging provisions relating to Benefit in Kind, Personal Reti…

Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are technical amendments to reflect in the Long Title of the Bill amendments made to the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995 and the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2023 on Committee Stage in the Seanad.

As indicated on Committee Stage, I am introducing amendment No. 3 to amend section 39. This is to provide greater clarity and certainty to those involved in family law proceedings, including legal practitioners, regarding the initiation of family law proceedings in the family law court divisions. As I stated on Committee Stage, the extension of concurrent jurisdiction to include the family District Court is an enabling measure to allow appropriate cases, especially those that are not contentious where most if not a…

Amendment No. 4 is a technical amendment to enable section 69, as amended by amendment No. 5, to be moved from Part 7 to Part 8. With regard to amendment No. 5, Senators will recall that, on Committee Stage, I indicated that I was examining what is now section 69 with the intention of introducing an amendment to the section on Report Stage. Senators will be aware this section provides that where the family High Court, family Circuit Court and family District Court have concurrent jurisdiction for proceedings under …

All these amendments aim to do two things: first, to remove all the incitement to violence or hatred provisions from the Bill; and second, to deal with the consequential amendments arising from enactment of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023. I will deal with these separately and will start with the first tranche. As Senators are aware, the Bill originally aimed to achieve two objectives which were to update and modernise our existing incitement to hatred laws, and to introduce hate crime prov…

Very briefly on this again, I will refer back to what exactly we are trying to achieve here. The amendments we are speaking to are technical in nature and remove quite a significant part of this legislation. I genuinely regret that this is where we are at now. For a lot of legislation, you will not always reach a consensus but for the most part, you need to have a consensus and that was not there in this instance. I accept that. The next Dáil and the next Seanad, whenever they come into being, will need to find a w…

They are real crimes but these are real people who are more likely to be targeted because of the fact they are transgender. Senator Mullen's amendments and his objective here would mean that these people are not protected.

I would like to hear from Senators throughout this debate. If the objective of this Bill relates to people who are targeted simply because of who they are - we can clearly see this, and the reason we have chosen these characteristics is because we know these people are more likely to be targeted - why would Senators not include in this Bill people who are more likely to be targeted than others? The objective of this Bill is to protect those who are more vulnerable, and these are vulnerable people. We need to unders…

In a court of law their perpetrator would not get a higher sentence compared to somebody who was attacked because of the colour of their skin, where they came from, their religion or any other characteristic, disability or otherwise. They would not be protected. They would have to produce a certificate. Should I have to produce a certificate if I am attacked because I am a woman? Should the Senator have to produce a certificate if he is physically attacked? That is what he is asking. This definition of gender is fo…

Amendments Nos. 2 and 13 are required because of the removal of the Schedule to the Bill, which itself is due to the proposed removal of Part 2. The provisions in Part 2 were intended to address most of our outstanding obligations to full transposition of Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law. This is why it is referenced in the Bill. With the deletion of the incitement to violence or hatred provisions…

I have read them.

I have read them.

I have read them and I understand-----

I have read and understand the intention behind the Senator's amendment, but it does not protect-----

-----a transgender person.

It is precisely these people who are at risk of being victimised due to their gender identity. Protection cannot, and should not, be limited to binary gender identities of male and female. Let me be abundantly clear: this legislation has nothing to do with a victim's legal status. The definition of gender set out in this legislation-----

-----applies only in the context of hate crime.

I stand by my point.

The definition of "gender" set out in this legislation applies only in the context of hate crime. We need a broad and inclusive definition of gender because we are, by and large, a broad and inclusive society that encompasses these diverse gender identities.