I will touch on a few points there. The length of time An Garda Síochána can hold a person in respect of knife crime is going to change in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill going through the Houses and which I hope will be enacted before the summer recess. The Senator mentioned the expert forum on anti-social behaviour. A piece of work is being done through the forum to look at other jurisdictions, Scotland being one of them. In Scotland they engage to a significant degree with the hospitals, the…

With the agreement of the House, I will probably give a lengthy response if that is okay because I do want to respond-----

I will not take that long. I promise.

I appreciate that there have been a lot of contributions, not just today but last week as well. I also appreciate the views that have been shared and recognise that these are complex, varied and different. I will set out some clear facts and try to respond to many of the comments and statements made and questions posed over the past week. What we are proposing here is not radical. It is not new. It is the norm in many EU member states. What we are introducing is new legislation for hate crime but we already have le…

Reference was made this afternoon to J.K. Rowling. I have read her commentary and have seen a lot of what she said. Again, she would not be prosecuted under this legislation. Identities described in this House as nonsense - a person's ability to identify in whatever way they so wish - is not hate speech. I might not like what is said in that way, and many others might not like it, but it is not hate speech. Many examples have been given in this House and I am saying very clearly that this is not what we are talking…

I thank them and acknowledge the work they have done in contributing and taking part in the overall consultation of this. As I mentioned at the outset of this debate, it is common legislative practice to have different meanings and terms in different Acts specific to the purpose of the legislation in question. This is referring to gender for the purposes of this Bill. It is provided that, for the purposes of this Bill, gender means the gender of a person or the gender of which a person expresses as a preferred gend…

It is good to be back. I am delighted to be here specifically to deal with this Bill. I thank Senators for attending this evening's debate. I am pleased to present this Bill and to have the opportunity to discuss it with Members of the Seanad. The Bill has obviously gone through the Dáil and it is important that we have an opportunity to discuss and debate in this Chamber. Enactment of this Bill will deliver two important programme for Government commitments, first to introduce hate crime legislation for the first …

I would appreciate it if I could continue as there is a lot to cover and I would be able to address much of what is coming up.

For the purposes of this Bill, there are 12 aggravated offences which can be classified as "hate crimes". These vary from very serious offences like assault to violent public order offences or criminal damage. These offences have been selected as they are the most commonly cited crimes against people on identity grounds. Where a perpetrator is found guilty of one of these offences that is aggravated by hatred, a sentence uplift will be applied in comparison to the base offence. It will be a matter for the trial jud…

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate. Community safety is about people being safe, and just as importantly, feeling safe. We want visitors to Dublin to be able to enjoy our vibrant, historic capital city. We want the people who live in it to experience it as a friendly, safe place to bring up their families and go about their lives. We want those who work in the city to have peace of mind that Dublin is a safe, welcoming place to do business. I think we all agree with those statements. T…

It is thriving.

If we did that, we would need to have one for Cork as well.

To respond briefly to the previous conversation, I reiterate nobody is being excluded and nobody is being disqualified. Everyone must go through the same process, irrespective of what level along the Judiciary he or she is. They merely have to go through a process. Nobody should be excluded from that, irrespective of who he or she is, particularly where we are talking about a promotion. In terms of the international standards, I suppose what I was saying or meant was to some extent having regard to international st…

I fundamentally disagree with the argument that just because one is a sitting member of the Judiciary one should not have to go through an interview process. I have not engaged with just the Attorney General, but also the Chief Justice and many others. There does not seem to be a view that this is something that should be excluded or removed from the Bill. What does anybody ask anyone in an interview process? Structures need to be set out, and that will be done. What the Senator is suggesting is that a panel on the…

I thank the Senator for putting this forward. This group of amendments is proposed in respect of sections 39 and 56. Section 39 specifically deals with the recommendations of the commission being based on merit. Subject to that requirement, account shall be taken of other objectives, which include meeting the needs of users, as the Senator said, of each court in the State with respect to proceedings being conducted in the Irish language. Section 56 deals with consultations and submissions or observations at the req…

This section sets out exactly what it sets out. It prohibits canvassing for individual positions. It is based on the fact that every person will go through a process. Names will obviously be put forward and the recommendation will be based on those names, the interview process, and the information that has been provided from the commission itself. Yes, the section states that canvassing will be an offence. I do not anticipate that we will go around prosecuting people, but it is very clear in this Bill that canvassi…

No.

The three individuals who are put forward to be shortlisted will be notified. Anybody who is not shortlisted can request and ask but will not be notified unless he or she requests it. If people are within the top three, they will be notified. A person can request to be notified or not. It applies if an individual requests to be notified. It had been the case that everybody would be notified following discussion and engagement. On a request put forward, it is now the case that if somebody requests to know, that pers…

Some people would want to know and some would not.

It is not going to be published beforehand but names will be presented at Cabinet. As Senator McDowell knows anything that comes before Cabinet is bound under Cabinet confidentiality. That is still the case. It is the same if I was-----