We are opposing the First Reading of this Bill, and I do so with some reluctance. I have expressed the view in the past that the First Reading should, in almost all cases, be allowed to go through, so that the House can see exactly what they are dealing with; so they can see the contents of the Bill and know exactly what is being put before the House.
In this case it is quite clear what is coming before the House, because we have seen the Bill, as printed in the Dáil, and I assume the Bill to be printed for the Seanad will be the same. The situation here is, therefore, somewhat different. We know what is coming before us and we disapprove of it. Consequently, we think it should be opposed from the very beginning.
We have expressed some surprise and suspicion at the extraordinary haste with which this Bill has been discharged in the other House, and almost immediately introduced in the Seanad. One would have thought that the Government would have given an interval of at least a week, so that the Seanad could consider the views expressed in the Dáil, and have time to look at the Bill which was discharged there, and be in a better position to decide if it should be allowed a First Reading in this House. One of the many things of which we disapprove is the extraordinary haste with which it was discharged in the Dáil, with no notice, and introduced here today with little or no notice or time for the Seanad to consider the position.
The real question to which we on this side of the House would like to have the answer is whether the Government have any serious intention of pushing this Bill through the House. Is this merely a manoeuvre or device to get it off the Order Paper in the Dáil? Sweep it under the carpet, send it to the Seanad and let it take its place with the many motions which have been on the Order Paper for many months past. If that is the case, if it is merely something to try to avoid embarrassment on the part of the Government, then we can treat that device with contempt and leave it at that.
Do the Government really intend to put this Bill through? It seems to me unbelievable that they are serious about putting this Bill through at the present time, before the Convention elections are held in the North, or before we have any idea of what kind of administration there will be in the North. It is quite clear that this Bill was introduced as part of the Sunningdale packet. In that context, when we expected to have a power-sharing Executive in operation in the North, when we expected to have a Council of Ireland, when we expected to have the position where the Executive in the North, and the Nationalist members of the Executive, would have some influence over the police and the legal structure there, then at least a case could have been made for this Bill.
I do not think that it would have been acceptable or workable, and I doubt very much if it would be constitutional. At least, I concede that it would be possible to make a case for it. In the present context, when the Executive has collapsed, where we have no idea of what kind of administration there will be in the North, and no satisfactory guarantee that the legal structure there will be acceptable to us in any way, then it is quite inconceivable that the Government should be serious in bringing this Bill in and putting it through, if that is their intention. I cannot believe that they are serious about it.
It must be realised that this Bill cannot be looked at in isolation. There is a similar Bill being put through the British Parliament so this means that if these two Bills go through, not only will our law officers and so on have to work in conjunction with the RUC, have to ask for facilities and help from the British Army in the North, facilities and help from the legal structure in the North, but, in turn, we will be asked to give the same facilities, the same help, the same co-operation to the RUC, and to the legal apparatus in the North of Ireland. We will have to give facilities and ask for facilities and there will have to be very close co-operation and collaboration between the two legal structures.
In the present context, where there is no acceptable government in the North, it is unbelievable that the Government would be serious about this Bill. A situation can be envisaged where we would be asked to help to produce evidence for a trial in the North of Ireland, a trial over which we will have no control. Certainly some of the trials that have taken place in the North in recent months and particularly one that took place there within the last week or two, give no confidence whatever that a person being tried for a kind of crime that is envisaged in this Bill would get anything like a fair trial. But we are being asked to introduce a Bill which, together with the Bill in the British Parliament, would be producing evidence and help to put people on trial before that kind of court.
As I say, I do not think the Government can be serious in suggesting that this Bill should go through at the present time. It may be—and I am not going to commit myself in advance— that in time we will have some kind of a power-sharing executive in the North where a Bill of this kind might be acceptable. I doubt very much whether it would be constitutional to do it, but it is just barely possible that something of this kind might be considered in the future. However, it is inconceivable that it should be done at present.
There is another aspect of this Bill which is very important to the Government and also to the Opposition. The Government have on many occasions expressed their concern for and their interest in what they describe as a bi partisan approach on the question of Northern Ireland. It is quite plain that if the debate here and in the other House has done nothing else it makes it quite clear that this Bill is extremely divisive, that it will mean, if it goes through and even if it is debated, there will be an end to co-operation between the Government and the Opposition on their approach to the Northern Ireland situation. It is quite clear that it will be divisive not merely between Fianna Fáil and the Government but, having regard to the vote that was held here today, it is quite clear that some of the Government supporters, that some members of at least one of the parties forming the Government, disagree very definitely with this Bill and will vote against it.
So there is going to be division, not merely between the Government and the Opposition but division within the ranks of the Government parties themselves. The Government have stressed in the past the importance of co-operation between the parties, of a united front between the parties towards the problems of the North. Apart from the other evils this Bill is going to perpetrate, it is going to put an end to that kind of co-operation and that in itself should be enough to persuade the Government to withdraw the Bill until possibly it might be appropriate at some time in the future.
If we really knew the answers to some of the questions that have been asked here today, we would be in a better position to vote and to know exactly where we stood in regard to this First Reading. If we knew what the intentions of the Government were it would be extremely helpful. If we knew the reason why the Government suddenly discharged it from the Dáil and hurried it into the Seanad it would be very helpful in deciding our position on this Bill. Not knowing the reason why that was done, not knowing the intention of the Government in the future and not knowing why this Bill is now before us, we have no alternative but to oppose a measure which from every point of view is going to be a bad one, is going to create trouble not only within the Parliament between the Government and the Opposition but even within the Government parties themselves.
In the circumstances, I have no alternative but to say that we are against the introduction of this Bill and we will be against it if the Government attempt to put it through this House.
