I am saying that the Attorney General argued the exact contrary to the majority decision of the Supreme Court. Let us be 100% clear. The Government's position was that this is compatible with the Constitution. The majority of the Supreme Court said it is not. For some reason, the majority, including those who thought it was constitutional, then subscribed to an obiter dictum stating that if the Arbitration Act 2010 was amended in a particular way, that would cure all the difficulties. With respect, that logic is de…

They did not answer his points at all.

They did not.

He was in the minority.

I second the motion.

On a point of order, I received a letter today signed by the Cathaoirleach, which said that amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 26 in my name are being ruled out. I want to explain to the House that this a matter of fundamental democratic importance. Amendment No. 26, as the House will see, refers to a requirement that gardaí who deploy stop and-----

No, I am sorry, I am making a point of order. I am making it very clear to the Leas-Cathaoirleach that, as far as I am concerned, this Committee Stage does not proceed until the point I am dealing with is resolved satisfactorily. I am not going to co-operate with anything. There is going to be a vote on everything. I wish to explain to the House why that is. Amendment No. 26 in my name requires gardaí who stop and search people, in addition to the requirements to make a record which are provided for in section 12 o…

I have spoken to the Cathaoirleach and I know the background. I know his attitude to this and where this came from.

It is just the cost of amending the system.

I might just make one point. I do not believe, I am afraid, any suggestion that the cost of adjusting the computer occurred to the officials at this House without the Department raising it. I do not believe that. I am not a child. I am not a fool. If the Cathaoirleach and staff of this House by themselves said, "Oh my goodness. This could involve a change to the computer system which might cost money", we would have big trouble in this House. The truth is as I articulated earlier, that the Department made the point…

A communication of that fact was put to this House. I am not a child. I am not stupid. I deserve a tiny bit of respect. To say to me that the Department was not involved is childish.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit anocht. Very few things have been said here with which I could possibly disagree. The motion is one I firmly support, but I want to bring some reality to some of the political debate we have had because we now have, as was said here, a massive growth in population. When I was made Minister for justice in 2002, there were 3.9 million people in Ireland. There is now 5.46 million. The number of gardaí for each citizen was one for 330 when I became Minister and it is now one for 378, s…

I welcome the Minister of State. I want to put on record my total opposition to the passage of this legislation. I believe it to be unnecessary, legally dishonest and potentially calamitous for Irish interests. As a preliminary point, I wish to state that I do not believe any Irish interest is served by our ratification of CETA. The free-trade elements of CETA have already been in operation for nine years. In that time, Irish exports to Canada have quadrupled and Canadian exports to Ireland have increased from €3 b…

Disgraceful.

How was it unconstitutional if all that is true?

It decided that to ratify CETA as the Minister of State was reading it was unconstitutional.

They decided the document before them could not be ratified.

Where was the constitutional problem?

Where was it unconstitutional?

Why was it unconstitutional if you are right?