asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the British Government notified the Government of their intention to renew and extend the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Prevention of Terrorism Act.
23.
The British Government did not notify the Irish Government of their intention to renew and extend the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1976.
The way in which the Act is applied is kept under close and continuous review. When representations are made to the Minister about difficulties which may have arisen for Irish citizens, such difficulties are pursued with the British authorities in an appropriate manner.
In view of the fact that the renewal and extension as reported means that an Irish citizen who refuses to fill up an identity card at a point of entry into Britain can be liable to a fine of £200 or three months in jail, or both, does the Parliamentary Secretary consider that such notifications should have been indicated to our Government and, if not, does the Parliamentary Secretary think that it is now time for our Government to inquire into it?
No, the British are not under any obligation to communicate their legislative activity to us as we are under no obligation to communicate ours to them. Whenever the Department become aware of any allegations that the Act is being used in an illegal or in an arbitrary way, the complaints made to the Department are taken up and pursued with the British. The Deputy will recall that this legislation of the British was enacted as a direct response to a most horrific act of mass murder in which 20 people died and dozens of others were maimed for life, in order to make a political point. I consider that the British are entitled to take what seem to them reasonable measures to ensure that that does not happen again.
There is an implication in the Parliamentary Secretary's last sentence which I totally reject, that I or anyone on this side of the House do not accept that they can take reasonable measures. I resent the implication.
I do not suggest that.
Order. Let us proceed by way of question and answer.
Sometimes when implications are read into replies, it is necessary to clarify the matter. Allowing that the British Government have no obligation to communicate, does the Parliamentary Secretary not consider that it would be desirable that ordinary travellers from this country who could be liable to such sanctions should at least be notified fully of the effect of their refusal to fill in this form? That would simply be a matter of courtesy. Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that such a courtesy would be due to people who otherwise would have no notice of the consequences to themselves of their failure to fill up the form?
I have not the details of individual cases but I agree with the Deputy that to apply the penalties of the Act to somebody who might have no idea that they might be applied would be a harsh act but the Deputy will understand that a campaign of terrorism will produce a response which will be uncomfortable and inconvenient for the innocent as well as the guilty.
I acknowledge that, but so that the innocent will be fully informed and so that they should not suffer unduly, would the Parliamentary Secretary not think that it would be desirable for the British Government to communicate with our Government about the extension of this to include these extra sanctions?
They are under no such obligation. Anyone in his own country or travelling to another country is taken to know what the law is in a particular place.