I will not delay the House much longer on this matter. I believe the phraseology of subparagraphs (b) and (c) is very vague: "political ... society" and "address a meeting of a political ... society". Could a person speak in private to a society? What is a political society? The language is unnecessarily vague. On Report Stage, some effort should be made to add extra definition to these terms by reference, say, to the Electoral Acts. If we say someone is collecting for political purposes, that has meaning. However,…

I am totally in favour of drug testing and a drugs-free Defence Forces, so what I am about to say should not be taken as being in any way negative. It is proposed that the Minister should be able to make regulations in this regard. Subsection (2)(a) states that the Minister should be able to determine specified concentrations in samples. I wonder about that. A person can have controlled drugs in his or her bloodstream for perfectly legitimate reasons. On the other hand, he or she could have a massive presence of so…

Two points arise from that. I forgot to mention subparagraph (i), which refers to "the concentration of a controlled drug or psychoactive substance required to be present to yield a positive result in a sample". That is a quantitative decision to be made. Will it be the same as the Road Traffic Act or will it be something-----

I do not believe that this is particularly the case. For instance, under the road traffic legislation, the mere fact that a person may have a controlled drug like a steroid in his or her bloodstream does not automatically mean that he or she is committing an offence. These matters are provided for by statute. The point that worries me somewhat is a very simple one. When I was Minister for Justice, I remember the Attorney General telling the Cabinet that there could not simply be random tests of motorists, that ther…

I notice that the penalty for contravening Section 258(A) is a fine only on summary conviction. Is it the case that no greater penalty than a fine can be imposed for repeat offenders and the like? Is there any way to take on people who consistently and repeatedly usurp the term "Óglaigh na hÉireann" to describe terrorist organisations? A fine may not be of much use to achieve that result.

With regard to this proposal, I must express continuing astonishment that the Bill is in its present form, in view especially of the almost unanimous view of elected representatives in both Houses that this is problematic. The use of the party Whip to push it through is strange indeed. Proposed section 321(3) states, "The External Oversight Body shall be independent in the performance of its functions." Section 323(1)(c) provides that the Secretary General of the Department of Defence shall be an ex officio member.…

Looking at the Bill, this is not a temporary institution. It is a body corporate intended to be a permanent part of the Defence Forces. It is not there to just deal with the urgent requirement - and I totally agree with the Tánaiste - for a change of culture, particularly in relation to certain aspects of the Defence Forces, including the treatment of women and how dissent is handled. This is to be a permanent part of the Defence Forces and a body corporate with its own seal. It is to be there in ten or 15 years' t…

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." This Bill is brought about with the aim of achieving accountability and performance and by reason of a crisis that has emerged regarding the provision of surgery for scoliosis victims in the State. There are other people with spinal conditions, such as spina bifida and others, which are also similar in the problems and challenges the people who have them are confronting. The Bill is simple. Paragraph 1 reads: The Health Service Executive shall establish and maintai…

I very much welcome the tone and content of the Minister's remarks. I did not come here to grandstand. I did not come here to exaggerate or exploit the obviously difficult situation that has arisen in respect of scoliosis and allied spinal conditions. The Minister has frankly admitted to this House that he asked the HSE and CHI how much money they needed and they said €19 million. He went and got that from the Department of public expenditure. I presume getting that funding was not so easy if my ministerial experie…

Next Tuesday, with the agreement of the Whip.

I second the amendment proposed by Senator Keogan on the Order of Business. Whereas I do not share many of the views expressed in this House on in vitro fertilisation and some aspects of surrogacy that some of the people in my group hold, it is important that we have a constructive debate. There should be no emotion, just simple discussion, because there are serious issues involved. I received an email from Senator Mullen which raised an issue we should think about further. Will a single male person be in a positio…

Hear, hear.

I propose to share my time with Senator Craughwell, if that is agreeable to the House. I will speak for eight minutes and he for two. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I welcome this legislation. It is kind of a mixed-goods wagon in railway parlance. I accept the proposition that the Title looks a bit clunky but the Bills Office would insist the Title has to reflect the content of the Bill. When changes are being made to criminal law, civil law, retirement law and the courts' structure, it must be outli…

I support the two resolutions and it would be a mistake at this time to allow either set of legislative provisions to lapse. The Minister of State's speech makes reference to the attempted murder of an RUC officer and the finding of improvised explosives devices in Ravensdale, County Louth, in recent times. There is in our society a movement that still believes it is somehow part of the Irish Republican Army, and its ideology, crazy as it may seem, is that the army council of that organisation is the legitimate gov…

I welcome the Minister of State. I am glad the law in respect of charities is the subject of updating legislation. I have a couple of problems I would ask the Minister of State to consider. On the provisions of sections 3 and 4, as I see it, the effect of these sections is to establish new definitions of charitable purposes for the purposes of the Charities Act. The introduction of the advancement of human rights as a recognised charitable purpose under Irish law for the first time is slightly problematic. The Iris…

I do not suffer from xenophobia, racist thoughts or racist impulses of any kind whatsoever. However, I am opposed to our ratification of this pact for a number of rational reasons that depend, at the outset, on an examination of how we got here. If we go back to the end of 1999, at Tampere in Finland, conclusions of an EU Council meeting included a commitment by member states to a number of things in the area of freedom and justice in the European Union and a common approach to asylum seeking. Based on that, a numb…

No.

I move amendment No. 1: In page 9, line 20, after “days” to insert “not earlier than 30th June 2025 as may be specified by resolution adopted by Dáil Éireann”. I move this amendment in my name and that of the other Senators. This amendment is solely for one purpose, namely to make an appeal to the Minister to create sufficient time to allow the Economic and Social Research Institute or some other body to evaluate the alternative method of dealing with auto-enrolment put forward by Mr. Colm Fagan - which we spoke ab…

Arising out of the Minister’s remarks, nobody serious has said the Fagan-Kenny approach is defective or pointed out some defect in it. They have all said it is interesting, it could be so and perhaps it would yield greater results. Nobody has said the reason it is wrong or the reason we should avoid it. The only argument I have heard offered against its adoption is that it has not been implemented elsewhere and it is, in that sense, untested. Without my amendment, when would it be proposed to commence the Bill, if …

I thank the Minister for her response and I acknowledge the response of my fellow Senators. In view of that response, I seek the freedom of the House to withdraw my amendment.