-----because the public needs to hear a very clear message from all of us in the Oireachtas. We have an important role to play right now. The country is in a tough spot and people are worried.

I have heard colleagues. We will meet and let us talk about how we can increase engagement. There is a lot of engagement but I have heard colleagues clearly on that matter. However, I have a request of them too. Let us try, for the next few weeks, to work as closely together as we can-----

-----to make sure a very clear message goes out to the public on what we can all do and what will work to push this virus back and protect people, families and our healthcare workers.

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." I am here to today to address the House on the Health (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill 2021. The purpose of the Bill is to strengthen Ireland's ability to respond to the ongoing and emerging threat to public health from Covid-19 and specifically, as colleagues will be aware, the new Omicron variant that has emerged. The Bill is being introduced in the context of the emergence of this new variant. It strikes a fair and proportionate balance between the protection of public …

To clarify out of respect for the Deputy, we are discussing exactly the point that he has raised so that we can give him the best possible answer.

I thank Deputies for their contributions to this morning's very productive debate. I acknowledge the very broad support across the House for the Bill while acknowledging there are Deputies who will not be supporting it for the reasons they have outlined. It was always going to be the case that any extension to legislation providing for mandatory quarantine or its reintroduction would only be proposed on the basis of strong public health rationale. The Bill before us permits the reintroduction of hotel quarantine. A…

-----but in the short time I have I will try to address some of the issues. One that Deputy Cullinane raised, which I think he is mentioning now, is incoming testing protocols. I do not think that is related to this Bill but to regulations coming in for broader testing. The short answer is the PCR test applies for those who are unvaccinated. The antigen test for 48 hours applies to those who are vaccinated and-or recovered. That covers the issue. If you are unvaccinated but you have confirmed Covid in, say, the pas…

I thank colleagues for their contributions. I will speak directly to the amendments in a moment, but with the Ceann Comhairle's indulgence, I might first address the various points that have been made, given that there has been a useful broader discussion. I will start with Deputy Boyd Barrett. I am delighted to hear that he is all ears. I am not surprised that he is opposing the measure or that Deputy Paul Murphy said his grouping would also. Deputy Boyd Barrett has opposed almost all, and maybe all, legislation t…

Maybe not all. I stand to be corrected on that. As is his right, the Deputy advocated articulately for a zero Covid approach. He also advocated for mandatory hotel quarantining for everyone regardless of whether there was any risk or rationale for doing so. It would not have been constitutional as a public health measure. It was interesting to hear Deputy Paul Murphy speak about the need for us to respect civil liberties. The mandatory hotel quarantine system that he advocated for did not remotely seek to achieve a…

Yes. Equality of treatment. Everything for everyone regardless of whether there was a rationale to deprive them of their liberties.

That is what equality of treatment would have achieved and is what the Deputy advocated for.

I was curious to see what reason he would give for not supporting the Bill this time, given that it seems to be very much in line with what he advocated for in the past, albeit a much more modest version. However, the Deputy is opposing it. Members should remember that we are not here to introduce mandatory hotel quarantine. We are here because we have very serious public health advice in the context of the new variant, which I hope will prove not to be as deadly serious but, as yet, we do not know. The advice we g…

I move amendment No. 3: In page 5, line 19, to delete “section 38S(1)(g)(i)” and substitute “section 38S(1)(j)(i)”. These are technical amendments arising from a drafting error in the Bill. They are very minor and refer to drafting matters and if any Member would like me to go into a detailed note, I have one, but these are essentially just technical amendments.

I move amendment No. 4: In page 6, line 37, to delete “subsection (6)” and substitute “subsection (7)”.

The comments were not on the amendment, which is what I want to address. For clarity, the regulations will provide for up to 72 hours for a PCR test and 48 hours for an antigen test. We have had a 72-hour requirement for PCR tests for some time. Regardless, therefore, of the regulations we bring in tonight, the current rules are that, for those 12 years or older, someone who is unvaccinated and who has not had Covid within the past six months has to get a PCR test within 72 hours of coming in. We are already doing …

Yes, the stipulation is not around where the test was taken but when. We can all find cases where it will not work terribly well. We can all find circumstances where a person could, technically, get a PCR test here before leaving, go to London-----

-----for a day and come home. You could not go to South Africa because you would have to home quarantine for ten days. In extremis , we can all find things in the legislation that do not necessarily work. We can also say there are people who are fully vaccinated who still end up in hospital, but that does not mean we do not provide vaccination. None of the measures are perfect. They are all imperfect layers of protection. We could spend the evening finding any ways of saying any particular measures do not work in c…

I beg your pardon. Yes, we should. It is late. I will not accept the amendment, but for the right reasons. What we want to achieve will be covered in the regulations. As far as I am concerned, the rationale is laid out in the regulations and the legislation, which relates to an imperative, time-sensitive medical reason. A termination of pregnancy absolutely qualifies, unambiguously. We have ended up with the Bill as it is now because when the original Bill was drafted, we were concerned about people who needed to g…

The points on masks and antigen testing are not relevant to the amendment. You cannot win. The Deputy stood up in this House time and again to say we need antigen tests and asked why we did not have them. When we bring them in-----

I did not interrupt the Deputy. She came in and said we need antigen tests and asked why we did not have them. The Government stated we have antigen tests and the Deputy stood up and said it was outrageous that we have them because an expert said they should not be used. You cannot win, in fairness.