Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Feb 1956

Vol. 154 No. 7

Irish Nationality and Citizenship Bill, 1955—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Justice (Mr. Everett):

The Bill and a memorandum explaining its provisions have been in the hands of Deputies since 14th December. On the Second Reading I propose to give, fairly briefly, the broad general outlines of what the Bill proposes to do, why particular principles are followed —some of which are at variance with the principles followed in framing the Act of 1935—and why the Government feel that the ends sought can best be achieved in the framework of the Bill before you.

First and foremost I feel that I should make a passing reference to the constitutional necessity to enact legislation dealing with the acquisition and loss of Irish nationality and citizenship.

Article 9.1.2º of the Constitution reads:—

"the future acquisition and loss of Irish nationality and citizenship shall be determined in accordance with law."

Undoubtedly, the task of framing legislation to give effect to the constitutional provision would have been undertaken more immediately following the coming into operation of the Constitution but for the war, and its aftermath, and all the attendant problems. As it is, the proposals in the Bill before the House have been under the consideration of Government for some considerable time. In some respects there was very little to choose between alternative proposals before the Government but it was finally decided to put forward the proposals in the Bill. All these matters will, of course, be brought to the notice of the House in Committee. The Bill is essentially a Bill to be examined section by section, and line by line. The Government feel that examination of the Bill should not be hurried and that Deputies should take all the time that is required for a painstaking examination of its provisions.

The Bill is in five Parts. Part I has the usual clauses relating to definitions, regulations and provisions for expenses, but the last section in this Part-Section 5—provides for the repeal of the Acts of 1935 and 1937 and at the same time it provides that all citizenships existing at the time that this Bill is being enacted into law will be preserved.

Part II deals with the ways in which Irish citizenship may be established or acquired—established by birth in Ireland and by descent through the blood, with formalities to be complied with in certain eventualities; acquired, by alien women on marriage to Irish citizens, by posthumous children, by foundlings, by adopted children, by the grant of citizenship as a token of honour and by birth in an Irish ship or aircraft.

Section 6—the section dealing with the citizenship of living persons born in Ireland or of an Irish father or mother—is, of course, the principal section of the Bill. In the Government's consideration of how Irish citizenship should be established, for the future, we had to go back and examine the provisions under which citizenship had been established hitherto, that is, under Article 3 of the Constitution of Saorstát Éireann (1922) and the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act of 1935, as amended by the Act of 1937. Article 3 established citizenship at a particular point of time, that is on the date of establishment of the new State—6th December, 1922; it provided for citizenship of both males and females domiciled on that date in Ireland who had been born in Ireland or whose father or mother had been born in Ireland or who had been ordinarily resident in Ireland for not less than 7 years; it also provided that "the conditions governing the future acquisition and termination of citizenship of Saorstát Éireann shall be determined by law." Now, in the event, the future "acquisition and termination of citizenship" provided for by Article 3 turned out to be the Nationality and Citizenship Act of 1935 (as amended by the Act of 1937).

In framing the 1935 Act the then Government provided that in the case of persons born after 6th December, 1922, citizenship might be established by descent from the father; secondly, by birth in the Twenty-Six Counties; and, thirdly, by registration within two years of birth in the case of a person born outside the Twenty-Six Counties on or after the passing of the Act (10th April, 1935) of a father born outside the Twenty-Six Counties on or after 6th December, 1922. There was no provision for citizenship by descent from the mother—as Article 3 of the 1922 Constitution seemed to foreshadow—and there was no provision recognising birth in the Six Counties as birth in portion of the national territory.

Reading the debates (Volume 54) on the early stages of the Bill which, later, was enacted into law as the Nationality and Citizenship Act of 1935, it is apparent that some provisions in the Bill were framed with a view to avoiding the creation of dual or multiple citizenship. This attitude was responsible, no doubt, for the rejection of suggestions that the Bill should provide for citizenship by descent from the mother as well as from the father and that alien wives should have a right to the citizenship of their Irish husbands.

The experience of this and other countries in the last 25 years goes to show that dual or multiple citizenship creates few real problems and that such problems as there are are solved reasonably satisfactorily by the rule enunciated by the Hague Convention on Conflict of Nationality Laws, of 1930, which lays down that a State in dealing with one of its nationals is entitled to disregard the fact that he also possesses the nationality of another State but cannot extend diplomatic protection to such a national against the other State of which he is a national. In other words, an Irish citizen within the jurisdiction can be dealt with without regard to any other citizenship he may have but when an Irish citizen is resident in another country of which he is also a citizen he cannot call on the Irish diplomatic mission or consular office in that country for protection.

Dual nationality cannot be avoided unless all countries were to frame their nationality legislation on identical lines. As it is, most countries, including our own, recognise the principles of nationality both by birth and by blood. Whatever the arguments may be against the concept of multiple citizenship this Government, at any rate, are determined that our nationality law should not be framed to exclude persons born in any portion of the national territory or persons who are of Irish stock. We are making provision, accordingly, and we are recognising in our nationality law, the principle of derivation of citizenship from both the father and mother. While derivation of citizenship from the mother is new to our law it features, of course, in the nationality laws of many countries—countries such as France and Turkey provide for derivation from the mother in full just as this Bill does; the United States of America does with a residence qualification; Belgium, Portugal, Argentina etc., with opting qualification and so on.

Under our existing citizenship law, the great majority of persons born in the Six Counties are Irish citizens. They are Article 3 citizens, or the children of Irish fathers, or citizens by registration. But there are new generations growing up: the children born of Irish mothers and children born in the Six Counties of fathers born since 1922 in the Six Counties. These generations are of Irish stock and this Bill provides for their Irish citizenship without the fulfilment of any artificial requirements on their part such as registration. Citizenship is, in our opinion, their birthright.

Before I leave Section 6, on which I have spoken just now as it affects the North, I should mention, of course, that the section will determine, without any shilly-shallying, the Irish citizenship of all those persons throughout the world who were born, before the establishment of the State, in Ireland or of a father or mother born in Ireland and who were not domiciled here on 6th December, 1922. Under existing law, such persons did not have Irish citizenship unless they took up permanent residence in the Twenty-Six Counties or, if permanently living abroad and not naturalised citizens of any other country, registered their names in the registers of nationals kept for that purpose. Under this Bill, they are Irish citizens without fulfilling formalities of any kind.

Deputies will observe in Section 7 that we give special recognition to the fact of birth in the Six Counties. As I have explained earlier—and this has been set out in some detail in the Explanatory Memorandum which was circulated when the Bill was being introduced—the vast majority of those in the Six Counties who, of course, are of Irish stock will have Irish nationality and citizenship when this Bill is enacted into law. The great majority who are Irish citizens under existing law will be turned into a still vaster majority but there will still remain a limited category born in the Six Counties since 1922 who are of entirely alien parentage without any racial ties, and for these, in recognition of their birth alone in that portion of the national territory which is for the time being outside our jurisdiction, we provide that on making a voluntary declaration their Irish citizenship operates from the date of their birth and is the citizenship of their children. Section 7 also provides for citizenship by registration in the case of persons born outside Ireland of parents who are Irish citizens born outside Ireland. This is somewhat similar to the provisions of existing law, but where our 1935 Act requires registration in the case of a person born outside the Twenty-Six Counties of an Irish father born outside the Twenty-Six Counties, this Bill requires registration only in the case of a person born outside the 32 Counties of either an Irish father or an Irish mother born outside the 32 Counties. A result of this new provision is that birth in the national territory of the Six Counties is recognised, just as in the Twenty-Six Counties, as enabling Irish citizenship to be transmitted from either the father or mother to the children in a never ending chain, without any formality of registration.

Turning to Section 8 which deals with citizenship in its relationship to marriage, the House will observe that we are providing that an alien woman on marriage to an Irish citizen will have a right to citizenship on making a declaration accepting citizenship. This is a departure from the provisions of existing law under which such citizenship can only be acquired by process of naturalisation and by permission of the Minister for Justice. To be naturalised, the alien wife of an Irish citizen must be residing in the State and bona fide intend to be resident here. Furthermore, such citizenship may be terminated on revocation of the certificate of naturalisation at the absolute discretion of the Minister for Justice. The provisions of the Act of 1935 are, we feel, out of harmony with the Constitution which, in Article 41, has concern for the institution of marriage upon which the family is founded. There are many ways in which citizenship in its relation to marriage might be treated. We feel that we are adopting a procedure which implements the constitutional concern for the family unit and, moreover, is of substantial convenience to the parties concerned. We do not go so far as to provide for the automatic grant of citizenship to an alien woman on marriage to an Irish citizen as that might not necessarily be in the interests of the parties concerned.

No doubt, we will go into the marriage clause fairly closely on the Committee Stage when we come to discuss Sections 8, 20 and 23. And it will suffice to mention here, I think, that marriage of an Irish citizen to an alien does not affect the Irish citizenship; on the other hand, marriage of an alien woman to an Irish citizen by birth or blood enables her to voluntarily acquire Irish citizenship while a male alien on marriage to an Irish citizen by birth or blood may get citizenship by process of naturalisation in which he may be exempted from complying with the conditions which apply generally to applicants for certificates of naturalisation.

The remaining sections of Part II of the Bill are concerned with minor matters which scarcely call for comment just now, save, perhaps, Section 12 which provides for the grant of citizenship as a token of honour; the grant of a certificate of citizenship by the President—which, under Article 13 of the Constitution, is exercisable only on the advice of Government—is intended to attach a special solemnity and dignity to such a grant. The certificate will not be revocable as was the corresponding certificate of naturalisation issued under the 1935 Act by the Minister for Justice on the direction of Government.

Part III of the Bill deals with the acquisition of citizenship by process of naturalisation and the circumstances under which a certificate of naturalisation may be revoked.

As under the 1935 Act, the Minister has an absolute discretion to refuse a certificate of naturalisation. There are certain conditions as to character, residence, etc., precedent to the grant of a certificate and these differ only in minor respects from the requirements under existing law. A new provision is that the applicant will require to make in open court before a district justice a declaration of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State. In special circumstances which are enumerated in Section 16, the Minister may dispense with the conditions of naturalisation.

It is in the section dealing with revocation of certificates of naturalisation that the Bill differs radically from the provisions of existing law. In the Act of 1935, the Minister has an absolute discretion to revoke any certificate of naturalisation and he is obliged to revoke in stated circumstances. Under the provisions of this Bill, revocation of a certificate of naturalisation may only be effected for stated reasons and after the person concerned has been given an opportunity of having the facts of his case reported on to the Minister for Justice by a committee with a chairman of judicial experience. We feel that persons who acquire Irish citizenship by process of naturalisation should have a feeling of security in their possession of that citizenship. They should be placed in a position of knowing, when they are acquiring Irish citizenship, that it can only be taken away from them for stated reasons and that before their certificate of naturalisation as an Irish citizen is revoked they can have the reason for revocation examined into and reported on to the Minister for Justice by a body, independent of his Department with a chairman of judicial experience. This line of approach will, I feel, commend itself to the House.

Before passing away from the naturalisation provisions, I feel that I should draw Deputies' attention to the fact that we do not propose to re-enact the provision in the 1935 Act which provides for revocation of a certificate when the holder has been convicted of a serious criminal offence. We feel that once a person has been admitted to Irish citizenship, he should be subject to the law generally applying to citizens, and no more: this view of the matter has been reached after careful consideration.

Part IV deals with loss of citizenship. In Section 19, we are providing that an Irish citizen ordinarily resident outside the Twenty-Six Counties, who is or is about to become a citizen of another country, may renounce his Irish citizenship by making a declaration of alienage in a prescribed manner. We are leaving it, as far as our laws are concerned, at the option of the Irish citizen living abroad who has a second citizenship, to retain or discard his Irish citizenship. The laws of his country of residence may require an individual allegiance. We do not think it right that we should insist on regarding as of Irish citizenship a person living abroad who is of, or is about to acquire, another citizenship and wishes to have only that citizenship. There is no provision for renunciation of citizenship in the Act of 1935. On the other hand, while there is a provision in the Act of 1935 that Irish citizenship is lost on the voluntary acquisition of a second citizenship, this Bill does not so provide.

Here, again, is an acceptance of the idea of multiple citizenship which I mentioned already in discussing Part II of the Bill. We recognise that there may be cogent arguments for following the precedent of our existing law, but, on balance, we feel that our law should not deprive of Irish citizenship a person who goes abroad and acquires another citizenship. Ireland is a mother country, with large overseas populations, many of whom were forced to emigrate and to become citizens of another country for economic reasons, but who, nevertheless, have ties of affection and racial pride with the home land. Why should we seek nationally to disown our own flesh and blood, if the laws of their adopted country permit the retention of the citizenship of their birth and heritage?

The remaining sections of Part IV do not call for particular comment at this stage.

Part V is, in general, a repetition of provisions in the 1935 Act: it deals with the grant of citizenship rights and privileges to citizens of other countries on a basis of reciprocity, the establishment of a registry of births abroad, and the grant of certificates of nationality which will be prima facie evidence of the citizenship of the holder.

I do not propose to go further into the Bill just now. The memorandum circulated with the Bill gives, in detail, an explanation of the provisions. My fear is that Deputies may be confused by the wealth of detail in the memorandum and that in seeking to give an accurate, comprehensive explanation of the provisions of the Bill, the memorandum may have lost clarity, in addition to brevity, at some points.

I am confident that the principles of the Bill will receive general support and that any differences of detail will be ironed out in later stages.

Mr. Aiken:

I am very glad indeed that the Coalition Government are introducing this Bill. It derives, as the Minister said, from the fact that, in the Constitution which was passed by the Irish people, in spite of certain very violent opposition at that time, Article 9.1.2º reads:—

"The future acquisition and loss of Irish nationality and citizenship shall be determined in accordance with law."

As far as I can see from the Bill and from the explanation given in the White Paper which accompanied the Bill when issued it differs in no great measure from the existing citizenship law, but it does bring it up to date. It does get rid of the out-of-date phrases applying to the "Free State" which were in the 1935 Act, and it brings the terms of our law dealing with citizenship into line with the Constitution.

There are only one or two points I would like to raise at this stage. I agree with the Minister that the Bill can be more properly discussed in detail on the Committee Stage. However, I do not think that Section 7 is as clear as it might be although the Bill as a whole is very well drafted, much more simply than the previous legislation. Section 7 is difficult to read and indeed I have heard of two opinions being expressed by people who should be able to judge as to the effect. It would be as well between now and the Committee Stage if the Minister and his officials were to go into Section 7 and see whether the idea that has been explained by the Minister could not be set out in clearer language.

As regards Section 16, the Minister may grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation although certain of the conditions for naturalisation have not been complied with. Paragraph (a) says: "Where the applicant is of Irish descent or Irish associations." Neither in the 1935 Act nor in this Bill is that phrase "Irish associations" defined. I am just wondering whether it is necessary to have it in the legislation of to-day.

Section 21 (2) reads:—

"An Irish citizen may not renounce Irish citizenship under this section during a time of war as defined in Article 28.3.3º of the Constitution."

That Article is very wide and covers not only a time when the State is actually involved in war but also covers a time like the last emergency during the war when we had to take certain steps to protect ourselves, although we were not actually engaged in war. In order that the Government might be empowered to take those steps, we had to pass a resolution of emergency which has not yet been revoked. While it might be right to deny a citizen the right of renouncing Irish citizenship during a time when the State was actually involved in war, it is rather hard to hold him to that in a period like this last ten years, although we still hold on to the declaration of emergency. It might be better if, on the Committee Stage, we amended that section to give power to the Minister to agree to the renunciation of Irish citizenship by a person when the State is not actually involved in war.

Section 23, as the Minister pointed out, amends the section which deals with this matter in the 1935 Act. The Act of 1935 did give the right to a person who married an alien to hold on to his Irish citizenship if he made a declaration to that effect within a certain time. However, I suppose there is something to be said for letting an Irish citizen who marries an alien retain his or her citizenship and if, in the working out over the years the Departments of Justice and External Affairs did not see any difficulty arising out of that situation, I suppose it is right to legislate in this particular way and to depart from the 1935 Act.

Those are all the points I wish to raise at this stage. This Bill is drafted in a clear and fairly easily understood way with the exception of Section 7 which, I think, is very difficult and perhaps it might be amended on the Committee Stage. I am glad, as I said at the outset, that the Minister has introduced this particular Bill.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins:

I intend to be very brief in my contribution to this discussion. Like Deputy Aiken I welcome the introduction of the Bill. I have read the Bill and the White Paper issued by the Minister and I find myself in the unusual position of agreeing once more with Deputy Aiken. The impression the preparation of the Bill and the White Paper made on my mind was similar to that made on his mind. The production and presentation of the Bill show that a very thorough examination of the position has been undertaken and that great care has been taken in its drafting and presentation. It is only right to say that because, whether we agree or disagree with the principles behind particular Bills, many of us often have the greatest difficulty in understanding what is written into the Bills.

Deputy Aiken has referred to Section 7 of the present measure. The House should extend a particularly hearty welcome to this section. As I see it, this section preserves the position in relation to people at present living in Northern Ireland who under earlier legislation had already been considered as natural-born Irish citizens. It does more than that. It also provides for many others who, because of the fact that they were not born at the time the provisions of the 1935 Act became operative—that is, that they were not born prior to the 6th December, I think it was, 1922— find themselves in the position that they are not under our legislation considered as Irish citizens. When this Bill is passed and when Section 7 comes into operation, they can, without any shadow of doubt, acquire Irish citizenship by taking the necessary steps. It seems to me that very many of the nationalists, particularly the younger nationalists, in the North of Ireland will welcome the manner in which their position is being protected by Section 7 of this Bill. Deputy Aiken made the point that the position might be clarified to a greater extent than it is, but, as far as the existence of Section 7 in the Bill is concerned, I welcome it and I think every member of the House will welcome it. I think it will also receive a very hearty welcome from Irish nationalists in the North.

The Minister has dealt with the principal differences between this Bill and the earlier legislation, and has pointed out that many aspects of the Bill will require to be dealt with in a more detailed way in Committee. I agree with him there. There are some major alterations of earlier Acts. I think the principal one, so far as acquisition of citizenship goes, is that citizenship by descent may be acquired now either through the father or the mother, whereas, under the 1935 Act, citizenship by descent could be acquired only through the father.

I congratulate the Minister and his Department on the introduction of this Bill. I agree with the Minister that there are many sections of the Bill that might be fruitfully discussed in a more detailed way on Committee.

Mr. Barrett:

I join with Deputy O'Higgins and Deputy Aiken in welcoming the introduction of the Bill, particularly Section 7, which, or something similar to which, could have been included in earlier Acts.

Whilst welcoming the Bill, I think, in places, there is looseness in drafting which should be cured before the House passes the Bill. I would refer the Minister to Section 16 (a) and subsequent sub-sections. Section 16 (a) says:

"The Minister may, if he thinks fit, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation in the following cases, although the conditions for naturalisation (or any of them) are not complied with:

(a) where the applicant is of Irish descent or Irish associations;"

Sub-section (b) also mentions "where the applicant is of Irish descent or Irish associations." We should in some way try to define "Irish associations." There is nothing in the definition section about it, and I think it is a bit wide and that the House should not allow the Bill to become law without in some way defining for the Legislature and for the State what "Irish associations" really means. It could lead to mischiefs in future.

I would refer the Minister to Section 15 (f), which says:

"Upon receipt of an application for a certificate of naturalisation, the Minister may, in his absolute discretion, grant the application, if satisfied that the applicant complies with the following conditions (in this Act referred to as conditions for naturalisation):

(f) he has made, either before a justice of the District Court in open court or in such manner as the Minister, for special reasons, allows, a declaration in the prescribed manner, of fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State."

I do not think that that portion of the sub-section which says: "or in such manner as the Minister, for special reasons, allows" should be allowed to pass this House. I do not think the Legislature should give carte blanche to Ministers in matters of that nature, should give Ministers too wide powers in a serious matter. I suggest that that portion of Section 15 (f) could usefully be deleted before the Bill passes the Oireachtas.

Like Deputy O'Higgins, I welcome the fact that a person can acquire Irish citizenship by reason of the citizenship of his mother. The Constitution reserves a very special place for woman and it is only logical that we, in the spirit of the Constitution, should accord to mothers, as well as fathers, the compliment that the Bill proposes to accord.

Mr. Lindsay:

What I have to say on this Bill must, of necessity, be brief. I appreciate, having examined the Bill and having had the benefit of the speech made by the Minister, that it is a Bill which is a compliment to the Minister's Department and to his draftsman.

There is very little that can be said about this Bill on Second Reading that could not be very properly and probably more effectively, and more carefully dealt with in Committee. It is reasonable to say that this is essentially a Bill for legal consideration and a Bill in which members of the legal profession on all sides of the House should take a keen interest. Remembering their own experience in dealing with the question of citizenship, as it arises from time to time in the course of their professional duties, it behoves them to give of their best to a Bill of this kind when it comes to that detailed consideration which is done for the most part in Committee.

The experience of most of us, probably the experience of everybody here, members of the legal profession and otherwise, must be invaluable in the consideration of a matter as far-reaching as the one we are now considering. On this stage there are two matters to which I should like to advert. One is that I think the introduction of this Bill will ease the lot of the person who had gone abroad and married somebody who was not an Irish citizen and who desired to bring that person back in order to acquire a little property in this country. Any of us with any experience of examining titles and advising intending purchasers in relation to stamp duty, whether it be £5 or £50 in accordance with citizenship, must keep that section in mind. This Bill removes the difficulties which were suffered by people who had been able to set aside certain savings abroad and who wanted to come back to their own country. That is a very welcome feature of this proposed legislation.

The second matter to which I should like to refer—and I feel sure everybody else in the House welcomes it too —is the all-embracing nature of this proposed piece of legislation in relation to Irish citizens and in particular to persons born in that part of our country which is still divorced from us —the six north eastern counties. As has been said, many people have been born since 1922—the qualifying date under existing citizenship laws. Up to now some of those people have, of course, been affected by the fact that they have been born later than that date in the six north eastern counties, and I think it is a very admirable thing and a very welcome feature of this Bill that the Minister for Justice, on behalf of the Government and on behalf of the whole Dáil, is spreading the mantle and enveloping all our sons and daughters, not alone here and in the Six Counties, but all over the world wherever they have been labouring and living in any circumstances.

Like Deputy Barrett, I welcome the special recognition given to the position of mothers. That is only in keeping, I think, with a very important legal decision given in this country some short time ago which also recognised the equality of position as between father and mother in relation to the custody of the children. There does not appear to be any useful purpose to be served in making a speech on the Second Reading of a Bill such as this merely for the sake of making a speech and I shall conclude by again congratulating the Minister and his draftsmen on introducing this welcome measure. I hope that on the Committee Stage he will be given all the advice and experience that certain Deputies are in a position to give.

Mr. D. Costello:

I have only two criticisms to make of this very excellent piece of draft legislation. I do not find myself in agreement with my colleagues about the proposed extension which is being suggested in Section 6 of the Bill by means of which the children of Irish citizens who will be born outside the jurisdiction of the State will become Irish citizens. Under the existing legislation, the right to become an Irish citizen when born outside this country was confined to the children of fathers who were Irish citizens. It is now proposed to extend the right of Irish citizenship to the children of mothers who were Irish citizens. I feel we are extending this right too far by giving citizenship to the children of third generation Irish people born outside Ireland.

It does seem to me that the principle which was enshrined in the 1935 Act should be maintained and that we should give citizenship only to second and third generation persons born outside Ireland when their parents, or one of them, was an Irish citizen. In the draft Bill as it stands we are going to widen legislation passed in 1935 and extend to the children of a mother born outside Ireland the benefits of Irish citizenship. As I say, it does seem to me that we are going to bring in a whole new section of people into the ambit of Irish citizenship and I feel it is too wide.

My other criticism of this section of the Bill is with regard to the registration clauses. Under the Bill as it stands, where a person is born outside Ireland and becomes entitled to Irish citizenship, because the person's father or mother was Irish, the person's birth must be registered in accordance with Section 27. There is an important change introduced into this Bill in comparison with the Act of 1935. Under that Act, registration had to be made within one year of the birth of the person and, in certain circumstances, two years. That particular safeguard has been dropped. As the Bill stands a person who claims to be an Irish citizen under Section 6 and Section 7 need not be registered at any particular time so that it will become impossible for us to know at any given time what is the number of Irish nationals and citizens.

There may indeed be a whole class of persons who would be entitled to be Irish citizens if they became registered but who would not bother registering themselves. When some of those persons may desire to come here, they may go through the formality of registration. I think this fluid position is an undesirable one and that there should be some time limit as to when the births of the persons who are born outside Ireland and who desire citizenship would be registered. It may be said that under Section 27 registration must be in accordance with the foreign births regulations and that perhaps in those regulations a prescribed period would be set down for the registration of births. If that is intended, I do not think it is a very good way of legislating and if it is intended that the existing principle should be maintained, and that persons entitled to Irish citizenship who were born abroad by reason of their parents being citizens, should be entitled to claim Irish citizenship it should be put in in black and white into this Bill that registration should be made within a certain definite time.

One other matter which occurs to me on this Bill is the fact that it has not dealt with the conflicting definitions of nationals which are contained in some of our earlier legislation. I want to refer in particular to the Control of Manufactures Acts. Under the present legislation a number of Irish nationals, or a number of naturalised Irish persons are not qualified persons under the Control of Manufactures Acts. It seems to me an anomalous position that we should be passing legislation now dealing with Irish nationals and conferring rights of citizenship on certain persons and at the same time excluding a number of persons who would be citizens from the benefits given to qualified persons under the Control of Manufactures Acts. I hope the Minister will accept an amendment of the Control of Manufactures Acts so that persons who become citizens under this Bill will become qualified persons under the Control of Manufactures Acts. It is also a fact that under the Moneylenders Act of 1933, the Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Act, 1933, and the Control of Imports Act, 1934, certain rights are given to a number of persons to whom this Act will not apply. I think the time has come now to rationalise our legislation and it seems to me that in this Act we should endeavour to see that where in our previous legislation an Irish national is defined he will be covered by the terms of this proposed legislation.

Dr. Esmonde:

I welcome this Bill very much because I think we all feel that anything that gives an extension in this country of our citizenship with adequate safeguards is a good thing. I must say en passant that the debate so far has been conducted by the legal fraternity. I think that we appreciate that in spite of some adverse criticism that has been directed towards that particular section of the community recently, it is rather fortunate we have them in this House for a highly complicated Bill such as this to give us the benefit of their expert advice.

I cannot pretend to have any legal qualifications whatsoever, but there are one or two things that I feel will lead to a certain amount of difficulty in this Bill in relation to the citizenship section. It is our aim and object to extend as far as possible citizenship to those who certainly have Irish blood in their veins and I welcome particularly the return to Ireland under our own Government of many people who emigrated in bygone days. I am now referring to those whose forefathers perhaps emigrated some generations back. I feel that this legislation should be directed towards providing Irish citizenship for those whose forebears left Ireland, even though a considerable time has elapsed since they went away.

I am not quite clear in my own mind on reading this Bill as to whether this legislation is to be retrospective. I feel when we introduce a Bill like this, that if we give Irish citizenship to our exiles, to descendants of exiles or to any other section of the community to whom we feel satisfied to give that citizenship, it should be possible with adequate safeguards, to make it retrospective.

With regard to the citizenship clause, sub-section (1) of Section 6 says that every person born in Ireland is an Irish citizen from birth. This is probably an innovation in citizenship legislation as it relates to the 1935 Act. It is, of course, desirable in one sense that anyone who was born in Ireland should be entitled to be an Irish citizen, but it seems to me to carry a certain amount of danger with it as well. There are, of course, in the world—I suppose there have been at all times—a great number of people who would be undesirable to us in Ireland, particularly in the circumstances of the world to-day, where it is divided more or less into two separate factions. It is undesirable that we should have people in this country with rights of citizenship who might be not exactly satisfactory, from the standpoint of Irish culture and Irish thought, or to the overwhelming majority of the Irish people. It may well be argued that anyone who is born here would, as a baby, inherit the national outlook on culture, and acquire the national outlook from the people in the country itself, but it is reasonable to assume from sub-section (1) of Section 6 that if you are giving nationality to anyone who is born in this country, you are also giving the right to the parents of that person, be it a male or a female child, even though they are not themselves obtaining citizenship, to remain in this country. You cannot very well, if you give citizenship to someone born in Ireland, say to the parents: "We do not like the look of you; you are unsatisfactory from our point of view; we think you ought to get out." You cannot very well do that, if you give to the child itself Irish citizenship.

As I say, I am not a lawyer nor an expert on citizenship, but I do not see exactly how we are going to get round that point, and I should like to stress that point now, so that it might possibly be considered at a later stage, perhaps on the Committee Stage, or perhaps the Minister and his advisers would consider if there is any way in which we could give adequate safeguards. I suppose it is very difficult to say that anyone born in Ireland should not have Irish citizenship, but I see inherent danger in this particular section and when we go to Section 13 very much the same thing applies: "A person born in an Irish ship or an Irish aircraft wherever it may be is deemed to be born in Ireland." That really opens up the same line of thought and I do not feel quite satisfied in my own mind that we should leave it as it is.

The other criticisms and suggestions I have to make with regard to the citizenship section is that Section 7 states that, pending the reintegration of the national territory, those born in Northern Ireland after the 6th December, 1922, are not entitled to the same rights, as are given under Section 6. I think it is universally considered by every public representative in this House, that, although we have to endure the status quo as it exists at the moment in regard to our national territory, we do not accept it de jure even though it exists de facto. It seems to me, if we are giving citizenship to anyone born in Ireland, we should let it be Ireland as a whole—if we are to enact this throughout our whole territory, the territory which by every right belongs to us and to nobody else and which should be under the jurisdiction of this Parliament.

Another matter that troubles me is that we could have been more liberal, as I said at the outset, to the descendants of Irish nationals, as I take it that we are not really giving citizenship to grandparents of Irish nationals. It is an accepted fact that Irish people who have emigrated, no matter at what period of Irish history they left the country, in the main, wherever they have been, have always created a colony—perhaps not in all cases, but in the vast majority of cases—of Irish and have married and bred as Irish amongst themselves. That is very evident in the New World, in the western world, anyway. We have large sections of the community who are of purely Irish blood down the generations. But by the clause which seems to come in under Section 7 we are excluding those people.

Where people, no matter how long they have been out of the country, can prove by their pedigree that they are of Irish descent, they ought to be in a position to seek Irish citizenship. If that were the case and if that became universally known, many of our emigrants, particularly in the western world, would come back to Ireland again and the vast majority of them would be glad to settle in the land from which their forefathers came.

I recently spoke to a Canadian whose ancestors left this country as far back as 120 years ago. He can prove pure Irish descent and pure Irish blood. People such as these who can prove Irish descent should be entitled to Irish citizenship, if they want it. After all, we have made a good many people Irish citizens and occasionally one sees in the newspapers the queer names of people admitted to Irish citizenship. I feel that we should liberalise as far as it is possible our legislation in order to permit the acceptance of those people who can prove Irish descent. By doing that, we would help considerably to bring many of those to settle here who went away in the past.

There is one further point on which I should like clarification; it is a point upon which I have not been able to satisfy myself, either by going through the White Paper or the Bill itself, and that is as to whether any of these new clauses in operation are retrospective in any sense whatever. I know of people who have come back to Ireland. In one particular instance, the person was of pure Irish blood. His father and mother were both born in Ireland, but he was born outside the country. This person returned to his native land and he was a man of considerable wealth and property. He spent a lot of money in Ireland and employed a lot of labour, but was excluded by certain operative clauses with which this Department is not concerned from the benefits allowed to Irish citizens in regard to the imposition of tax.

This particular person has not to go back to his grandparents to prove that he is Irish. I should like to feel that this Act will put him in the position of entitling him to call himself an Irish citizen at all times. We should be generous in that respect. After all, if, under Section 6, we are going to allow citizens of doubtful alien parentage to become Irish citizens with all the benefits that flow therefrom, we ought to consider making our legislation as open as possible, so that Irishmen, or the descendants of Irishmen, can feel they are welcome in their own land; that they should be citizens from the day they came to the country—a country which they or their forebears left under conditions of hardship. They should be welcomed back to the old country as being Irish from the time they were born, provided they can prove they are of Irish blood.

Mr. Everett:

As I pointed out, this is more a Bill we should discuss in Committee. I wish to express my deep appreciation to the House for the reception accorded the Bill and to assure it that I have made a note of the various points raised so that they can be considered. With a view to giving Deputies an opportunity of discussing the Bill further, I do not wish to take the Committee Stage until this day fortnight, but, if the House wishes a longer period, it can be accommodated.

This is a Bill in which every Deputy is interested and I am sure that every member of the House will give it his most careful consideration in an endeavour to do the best possible on behalf of the people. The suggestions made by members have been carefully noted and everything will be done to make this Bill as good a Bill as we possibly can.

Question put and agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle:

Next stage?

Mr. Aiken:

I suggest that the Minister's amendments should be out a week before we take the Bill on the Committee Stage. We could then discuss the matter the week after.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 14th March.