If somebody writes a letter and says, "Dear Minister, my name is Joe Bloggs and on the blank day of blank, the following happened. Please use this when bringing forward your legislation.", or "Dear Minister, we represent the such and such organisation or we are the blank hospital of the blank region of the country and at a meeting on the blank day of blank, it was recommended that we ask the Minister to bring forward safe access zones legislation", that is my point. The Minister has not given chapter and verse on t…

I am finishing now. The Government is pushing legislation at the behest of an invisible few. It does not have the slightest respect for the electorate. If the Minister did, he would be giving us chapter and verse. He would be showing us the Government's own studies as to whether this was in fact a problem. He would be bringing forward evidence of his careful consultation with the Garda and civil and healthcare authorities, but he has done none of this. He is the one who is being brazen, coming in here today without…

I want to respond to Senator Gavan. It is interesting how the Minister and now Senator Gavan reach for words that, as far as I know, are not in the Bill. Senator Gavan talked about the Bill preventing people from being harassed. I am in favour of preventing people from being harassed, but the word "harass" is not defined in the Bill because it is not in it.

It should be borne in mind that Senator Gavan is responding to the issues I raised in support of my amendment so I have to answer that. As I said, there is nothing objectionable about preventing conduct that is likely to obstruct or impede, or having the intent to obstruct or impede, another person. The problem is section 2(2) because the threshold is very low.

The reason-----

The reason we have to have this protection for free speech in higher education institutions is not so that students, lecturers or guest speakers can obstruct or impede somebody else from accessing abortion services. It is not to enable them to harass anybody. It is to enable them to communicate material to the public, or a section of the public, in a manner that is likely to influence the decision of another person. Senator Gavan talked about targeting. I accept there may be cases where a person is standing within …

-----refused to talk to pro-life people. The point I am making is this. A person who may be communicating, which is what we are talking about, material to the public or a section of a public may not have it in his or her contemplation at all to address his or her point or offer of help to anybody who in that moment might be going to an abortion clinic. They might be hoping that the person who sees it and who might be in a crisis pregnancy in six months' time would know that there is an organisation there that will …

The only opposition on a range of issues these days seems to be coming from Independents, particularly in this House. I ask Senator Gavan to at least reflect on whether this is about harassment because if it were about harassment, you would have every single person on board here but it is not.

Yes really. I think I have a better record than many people in the Senator's party about never ever harassing people and not supporting harassment in any way, shape or form. Sinn Féin has not been angels in the world of social media, as I think we all know.

Sinn Féin has been wronged too on occasions but as an Independent, I will claim the space to-----

I will claim the space as an Independent to say that I do not need to apologise for my credentials to Sinn Féin or anybody else about my opposition to harassment of any kind.

We are on the word Senator Gavan used in response to my amendment, which was that this is about preventing people from being harassed. I said that if that was all it was about, we would all be on board with it. He put that in issue as though I was some kind of apologist for harassment, which I have never been and never will be. I will not even ask him to withdraw it because that is just playing silly parliamentary games. We are talking about a life-and-death issue here. The person who is most harassed here is the u…

Well where there is any harassment of women, shame on those involved in it but the person who pays the biggest price for what is going on here is the unborn child, who does not get to see the light of day. I appeal to people to rediscover their sense of compassion and human fraternity around that issue.

Can I ask for the assistance of the secretariat? If I press this amendment in the way I have just done, may I resubmit it for Report Stage?

So, I cannot resubmit it. That accords with my reflection. I thank the Chair.

I move amendment No. 2: In page 4, line 19, after “practitioner” to insert the following: “(other than a general practitioner who has notified the Minister that the practitioner does not wish the premises at which he or she provides healthcare services to be deemed, for the purposes of this Act, to be a relevant healthcare premises)”. This amendment refers to the definition of “relevant healthcare provider” as meaning a general practitioner. It excludes from that definition a general practitioner who has notified t…

I am not surprised the Minister is not engaging with it but it leaves the problem that there may very well be GPs providing, or not providing, abortions who are being used to stand up activism involving the pressurising of gardaí to pressurise decent people making a reasonable point. I have already been very critical of the cavalier approach being taken to freedom of expression in our democracy regarding what might happen on our third-level campuses. What we actually have is a lack of respect for people's essential…

I will withdraw it with a view to possibly bringing it forward, either in the same or another form, on Report Stage.

I move amendment No. 3: In page 6, lines 10 and 11, to delete “within 100 metres of an entrance to either House of the Oireachtas”. I welcome the Minister back. I want to reiterate, for the avoidance of doubt and given that this is an issue that can be contentious - as I said earlier on, it is a life-and-death issue - that though I have the harshest of criticism for the Government and for the Minister in the conduct of his duties and responsibilities in this area, none of it is directed personally. Sometimes it is …

Okay, I will get on with the point.