I wish the Members a happy International Women's Day. We will now take Leaders' Questions under Standing Order 29 and I ask Members to adhere to the time allocations.
Leaders' Questions
Newspapers have been reporting on multiple arrests in recent days in the course of a child abuse investigation in the Limerick-Tipperary area of Munster. Reports indicate that up to 20 children have been identified as victims of alleged sexual abuse. Concern has also arisen on the urgency of the response of State agencies when allegations first came to light. This could, in itself, lead to an inquiry as to whether every possible measure was taken to ensure the safety of the children immediately at risk when it became known that they were at risk. Apparently, such concerns have been expressed formally by a State employee who works in the welfare sector. There is an enormous level of concern locally about this as well as enormous public concern more generally.
I will not comment on the individual case any further. I raise it in the context of the broader issue of how well-equipped and organised State agencies are to deal with child sexual abuse and exploitation. The Garda Inspectorate report, which was published last week and which I raised on the Order of Business, gives rise to significant concerns as to the general capacity of the State to investigate child sexual abuse cases comprehensively and appropriately. The report benchmarks progress on the issue against an earlier Garda Inspectorate report of 2012 and indicates that only 45% of the recommendations of that earlier report are considered to have been implemented. Overall, the inspectorate is concerned at the limited progress in the implementation of some of the recommendations and at the time taken to progress others, including the introduction of a victims' helpline in 2017, which was approximately five years after the publication of the 2012 report. I just give the Taoiseach a sample.
The lack of implementation is disappointing and, in the opinion of the inspectorate, has had a negative impact on the delivery of services to victims. Child advocacy centres have not been established, notwithstanding that this was a very important recommendation of the 2012 report. Continuing cause for concern is the fact that inexperienced and untrained gardaí are still involved at all stages of child sexual abuse investigations, from taking initial accounts from victims and obtaining victims' and witnesses' statements to dealing with suspects.
Does the Deputy have a question?
I do, indeed. There are a range of other issues which I can deal with but the fundamental question is why is it that there has been such poor implementation of the recommendations contained in the Garda Inspectorate report of 2012 in relation to so grave an issue as the exploitation and sexual abuse of children?
Crimes of a sexual nature are among the most heinous crimes that can occur and crimes against children are the worst crimes imaginable. I am aware of the arrests of 11 people on Monday by An Garda Síochána. These people have been released and files will be prepared for the Director of Public Prosecutions. These arrests come as part of an intelligence-led investigation by gardaí into alleged sexual exploitation of children who are resident in the Newcastle West Garda district. As the investigation is ongoing, I cannot say any more about its details other than to commend the work of gardaí and Tusla to ensure these arrests took place. The crimes alleged are shocking, abhorrent and truly disgusting.
The Government is fully committed to the protection of children. Divisional protective service units have been established in An Garda Síochána to tackle special crime types, in particular domestic and sexual abuse. The Government will ensure that gardaí are supported in the fight against all forms of child sexual exploitation and abuse. The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, which this Government brought in, contains significant provisions in Part 2 to deal with and prevent the sexual exploitation of children. These measures strengthen the law in the area of child pornography and create new offences to target child sexual grooming which focus on those who use modern technology to engage with children with the ultimate purpose of sexually exploiting them. The aim of the provisions is to remove any gap in the law which could be exploited by those who prey on children for the purpose of sexually exploiting or corrupting a child. The seriousness of these offences is reflected in the potential penalties which may be imposed of ten to 14 years. These offences came into effect on 27 March 2017.
The specific report mentioned by Deputy Micheál Martin was brought to Cabinet by the Minister for Justice and Equality two weeks ago and we had a detailed discussion on it. We acknowledged that improvements had been made and we have been able to work with An Garda Síochána to support it to improve its capacity in this area. We also acknowledged, however, that there are shortcomings which remain. We will work very hard with An Garda Síochána in the months and years ahead to ensure its members have the resources, technology and training they need to protect our children.
Without question, the scale of what has been alleged in Limerick is shocking and may represent a first in this country. It is important to point out that 60% of all reported sex crimes in Ireland involve a child but only 4% of cases notified to gardaí result in convictions. I asked the Taoiseach specifically about the lack of implementation of the 2012 report. We are great at inquiring into the past, but I am struck by the lethargy and lack of proactivity in implementing the key recommendations. For example, a major gap has been identified in Garda powers to compel the lawful owner of a computer or other device to provide a password to facilitate access. Those new powers should be brought in immediately by the House. If we all agree that it is the most heinous of crimes to sexually abuse children, there should be far greater commitment to implementing the recommendations of a serious report of this kind, in particular given the relationship between Tusla and An Garda Síochána which was again found to be less than optimal in the 2012 report. The lack of co-operation and co-ordination is shocking at this stage.
There is total commitment on the part of the Government to the implementation of the report and the Minister and Government will drive those agencies, Tusla and An Garda Síochána, to do so. We will not take a hands-off approach when it comes to requiring these agencies and bodies to implement the report. The Garda Inspectorate's original report of 2012 made 29 recommendations, almost all of which were operational in nature and directed at An Garda Síochána. The recent follow-up review finds that of the 29 recommendations, 13 have been implemented fully, six have been partially implemented, six have not been implemented and four have not been satisfactorily addressed. Ms Caroline Biggs SC has agreed to chair the implementation group. She was called to the Bar in 1997 and to the Inner Bar in 2009 and she is an acknowledged expert in criminal law. She prosecutes and defends criminal cases on a regular basis and has a particular interest in the investigation and prosecution of child sexual abuse. She has made written submissions on the subject to the inspectorate.
The Supreme Court has spoken and its decision is unanimous. Its judgment clears the way to advance the referendum on the repeal of the eighth amendment to the Constitution. I understand the Taoiseach had a correct concern for legal clarity before advancing the legislation and that, correctly, he did not wish to pre-empt or even create an impression of interfering or seeking to interfere with the decisions of the courts. Now, however, matters have been clarified and there is no reason or basis for further delay.
As the Taoiseach knows, the eighth amendment represents a real and ongoing threat to the health and lives of Irish women. Our recent history is marked with so many tragic episodes of that hard reality. The eighth amendment has cast a shadow on medical practice. It places the threat of criminal sanction against doctors for making medical decisions in the best interest of their patients. It has to go. The eighth amendment is a relic of an Ireland of the past, yet it restricts the rights of women in the here and now and profoundly affects our welfare. It should not have been introduced into the Constitution in the first place.
The first piece of the puzzle facing us is the publication of the referendum Bill. Now that we have legal clarity and given the unanimity of the Supreme Court decision, I put it to the Taoiseach that the Cabinet needs to meet the Attorney General on this matter today and the legislation for the referendum ought to be published today. When the Business Committee meets today, it should schedule a debate immediately, starting tomorrow. We should have a full day's sitting on Friday to advance this legislation because time is not on our side.
We all appreciate that we need to create a better Ireland for our sisters, daughters and women. This is an opportunity to ensure that we never again allow women to be faced with the injustice and degradation that generations have gone through. Of course, the referendum is about the whole of Irish society coming together and saying women are entitled to their fundamental right to health care. We have an historic responsibility to establish this right. Respect and compassion for women must prevail. It is time to trust women. It is time to allow doctors to do their job, and it is time for us, as legislators, to do ours.
We have an important responsibility to pass the legislation on the referendum in a timely fashion. Will the Cabinet meet today to discuss the judgment and receive the advice of the Attorney General? Can the referendum Bill be published today? Can we commence the debate tomorrow and have a full day's sitting on Friday?
The Supreme Court issued its judgment this morning in Limerick. The Attorney General has asked for the remainder of the day to study that judgment. As Deputy McDonald rightly pointed out, it is important that we get this right. As Deputy Micheál Martin pointed out yesterday, it is important that we dot the i's and cross the t's. We do not want to make any unforced errors when it comes to a referendum on changing the Constitution. Therefore, the Attorney General has asked for the remainder of the day to consider the written judgment. I have agreed to that. The Cabinet will meet tomorrow at 11 a.m. to hear his advice. It is our intention to publish the referendum Bill tomorrow, with the possibility of its being discussed in the House tomorrow night or, if not tomorrow night, on Friday. I understand the Business Committee will meet tomorrow after the Cabinet meeting to discuss whether there will be a Friday setting or whether the Bill will be discussed on Thursday night. The publication of the Bill and its introduction in this House will allow us to establish formally a referendum commission for the referendum, which can begin its important work almost immediately. That is certainly what I wish to do.
This is going to be a profoundly deep and difficult debate for many people in this country. It is my strong wish that it be a respectful debate and one that is never personalised. I know everyone in this House will want to show leadership in that regard and ensure the debate is respectful of all sides and opinions because people are entitled to their personal opinions on this deep issue of conscience. Above all, the referendum will be about asking the Irish public to change our Constitution – our basic and most fundamental law – to say that we, as a country, people and state, trust women to make these decisions for themselves and to decide in the early weeks of pregnancy whether they want to be pregnant and whether they are able and willing to be mothers. It is also a question of trusting our doctors to determine later in pregnancy when it is medically appropriate for a termination to occur. That is fundamentally the question we will ask the Irish people to answer, ideally with the co-operation of the House, before the end of May this year.
Like every Member of the Dáil, I am sure, I share the Taoiseach's wish that the debate be measured, informed, respectful and enlightening. That is our wish. For our part, we will do everything to set that tone. I appreciate the Taoiseach's comments in that regard. I appreciate that the Taoiseach does not want to make unforced errors or to rush but I have to put it to him that this subject has been marked in our political history not by urgency or rushing but by delay, prevarication and a lack of willingness to act decisively. We need to turn that corner too. I appreciate that the Attorney General has to do his job in a methodical and thoughtful fashion. I ask the Taoiseach again, however, to consider the timetabling with a sense of purpose and urgency. If the legislation can be published sooner than tomorrow, it should happen. Certainly, the debate ought to commence on Thursday. We need a full day's sitting on Friday.
The Deputy is correct that there have been delays and obfuscation regarding this issue down through the years. There were unacceptable delays in legislating for the X case. There were delays in allowing for a referendum and legislation to allow people to have access to information and to underline the right to travel. The Deputy is correct that there have been long-standing delays in dealing with this difficult issue. When I stood up here on my first day as Taoiseach, however, I said this matter would be one of my priorities. I tasked the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, to bring forward proposals for a referendum. I said there would be a referendum and that it was my intention to have it before the summer of this year.
With regard to my role in this, nobody could accuse me, as Taoiseach, of causing any undue delays on this issue but I do not want to make any mistakes either. When the Attorney General asks for a day to consider the written judgment, the Attorney General will get a day to consider the written judgment. I agree with the Deputy, however, that if we can have the Bill in the House tomorrow night, we should. If not, we should have a full session on Friday.
The last few days have been dominated by rows about communication and the ability of the Government to spin. It would be useful if some of those skills could be applied to the Brexit conundrum because there appears to be a unique difficulty communicating with the British Prime Minister. In her speech last Friday, Mrs. May indicated she and the Taoiseach agreed that both our countries would work alongside each other and the European Commission to find a solution on the Border. She appeared to suggest that the Taoiseach had taken a shared responsibility to find a solution. Her exact words were, "the Taoiseach and I agreed when we met recently that our teams and the Commission should now do just that." Speaking on "Morning Ireland" on Monday, however, the Taoiseach said there would be no three-way negotiations and that Ireland would conduct its talks as part of the EU 27.
It is beyond farcical that, 20 months into negotiations, weeks away from a crucial EU Council summit and little over a year before the UK actually leaves the European Union, the United Kingdom is still deaf to the fact that Ireland is negotiating as part of a bloc of 27, that the problems with the Border are a result of its red lines, and that it is incumbent upon the United Kingdom, as a country that has decided democratically to leave, to come up with solutions. On Monday in Westminster, the British Prime Minister proposed the US–Canada border as an example of a solution. It is a classic hard border. The EU Commission has translated the December agreement into legal terms but immediately the draft was published, the British Prime Minister ruled it out as completely unacceptable and as an agreement that no Prime Minister of Britain could sign up to, yet that is exactly what she had done in December.
The undeniable truth now is that the irreconcilable fudge at the heart of the backstop is that it is not possible for there to be no border on the island of Ireland or between this island and Britain if Britain pulls out of the Single Market and the customs union. To quote Michel Barnier, "The clock is ticking." The probability of no deal is increasing every day. It appears that even agreements hard negotiated can be resiled from with ease immediately after they are made.
Is it not time for this House and the Government to state, in absolutely clear terms, that the backstop position which was formally agreed between the EU and the UK last December cannot be achieved if the UK, as a whole, is not a member of the customs union or does not apply the rules of the Single Market? Is that not the fundamental truth that must be now clearly stated?
I have no difficulties communicating with Prime Minister May. We meet periodically and speak on the phone. We will meet again the week after next, following my return from the United States, when we will both attend the EU Council in Brussels. As I said on "Morning Ireland", the negotiations that occur will do so between European Union, on the one hand, and the United Kingdom, on the other. There will be no negotiations between Britain and Ireland. We negotiate as part of the EU, as one of the 27 member states, led by the Barnier task force and we are stronger for that. The United Kingdom might be starting to understand that negotiating with a bloc ten times bigger than itself is not a strong position in which to be. We will not allow ourselves to be cleaved from the European Union and any negotiations that occur will take place between the European Union and the United Kingdom, with our input into the European Union's position. Over the past year or so, we have successfully ensured that Irish issues are Europe's issues and we have the unanimous support of Prime Ministers across the Union for our position. This was demonstrated most recently by Prime Minister Xavier Bettel from Luxembourg who visited Ireland on Monday.
That is not to say that we cannot talk bilaterally. It makes sense that the Irish Government should talk to the Government of the United Kingdom which, after all, is the Government next door. We discuss things such as the common travel area, for example, a bilateral arrangement that we have and that is recognised by the European Union, which allows us to travel freely, north-south, east-west, between Britain and Ireland. We want to keep talking about that so as to ensure that it is protected. We can discuss with the UK Government options and solutions for avoiding a hard border on the island and any physical infrastructure or any associated customs and checks. It is reasonable that we do this and we have a responsibility to do it. I do not want to be in a situation in a year's time whereby, despite everyone's best efforts, somehow we end up in a chaotic hard Brexit with no agreement. I want to be sure that the Government I lead does everything possible to avoid a hard border on our island. That is why it is appropriate that we should have discussions with the United Kingdom, but talking about solutions and looking at options are not negotiations; the only negotiations can occur bilaterally between the EU and the UK.
I am also very conscious that there are so many people who live north of the Border who are Irish citizens and believe themselves to be Irish. That is why they cannot be left behind ever again and why we will move might and main and do all we can do as a Government to ensure it does not happen.
The words "moving might and main" are lovely but we have been hearing them for a year. It is an inescapable truth that we are heading towards a hard border. In the past hour, Donald Tusk published what the Financial Times has said is a rebuff of Theresa May's vision for trade after Brexit, laying out a narrow view of future relations between the UK and the EU. The negotiating position of the 27 is now, "Divergence in external tariffs and internal rules as well as absence of common institutions and a shared legal system, necessitates checks and controls to uphold the integrity of the EU single market". Despite all the talk, is it not a fact that we are now heading towards a hard border on the island of Ireland and a border between the island of Ireland and our biggest trading partner, the United Kingdom?
I thank the Deputy.
Is it not time that we actually faced that reality and tried to find a solution before we slip over the edge?
It is much more than words. The December joint report is not just words; it is written down in black and white. That is a political agreement and one by which the United Kingdom Government continues to say it abides.
He said it is impossible to deliver.
We have a draft withdrawal agreement, a legal text with an Irish protocol, which achieves what we seek to achieve, namely, ensuring that there is no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.
The Prime Minister said that it is undoable.
We have a solution, namely, option C. The question is whether there might be a better solution and that is what we now need to explore. It is right that we should explore it and that is what the Government will do.
I thank the Taoiseach and call Deputy Paul Murphy.
In ten days, on St. Patrick's Day, the Taoiseach is scheduled to experience the vice-like grip of Donald Trump. I take it he has been doing his hand exercises.
Steady on.
When it seemed safe that Donald Trump would not be elected, the Taoiseach's predecessor, Deputy Enda Kenny, described his comments as racist and dangerous. Over a year later, it is absolutely clear that it is not only his comments but that Donald Trump himself is racist, sexist and dangerous. His big and beautiful wall, which he continues to push as a means to whip up racist sentiment, has been matched with anti-immigrant executive orders which have resulted in families being broken up across the country, with over 100,000 arrested by immigration officials last year. The so-called dreamers, undocumented immigrants who came to America as children, including Irish people, now face the threat of deportation. He has called for National Football League, NFL, bosses to fire American football players such as Colin Kaepernick who take a knee in protest at the killing of black Americans by the police. His response to Charlottesville, a violent protest by far right and fascist forces, which saw the murder of Heather Heyer, was disturbingly revealing. He said there was blame on many sides and went on to describe the anti-fascist protesters as "very, very violent". He is a US President who not only bragged about sexual assault, and has not only been accused by multiple women of sexual assault, but whose policies and appointments reveal a deeply sexist and homophobic outlook. He has opened an attack against Planned Parenthood and implemented a series of anti-LGBT measures, including an attempt to ban transgender people from the military and overturning protections for trans school students.
In January, the doomsday clock for humanity was moved forward by 30 seconds to two minutes to midnight. The scientist responsible wrote:
Never before has the Bulletin decided to advance the clock largely because of the statements of a single person. But when that person is the new president of the United States, his words matter.
Those words include the threat of fire and fury against North Korea. Donald Trump threatens the future of our planet. His withdrawal from the Paris Agreement is matched by rolling back environmental regulations, pushing forward with oil and gas extraction, a drive to restart coal extraction and giving the go-ahead for the Keystone XL pipeline. He is a danger to humanity.
Time please, Deputy.
He is the ugly face of a capitalist system devoted to maximising profit at any cost. The best thing the Taoiseach could do would be to refuse to meet him, refuse to allow his racist, anti-immigrant policies to be greenwashed with a bowl of shamrock. The Taoiseach's response will be predictable - he will not do it.
I thank the Deputy.
I remind him of the commitments he made repeatedly when we have raised these issues over the course of the past year, namely, that he would raise them in the US in March.
The time is up.
March is here. Will the Taoiseach represent the views of ordinary people in this country and explain that there are those who oppose Donald Trump's attacks on the environment, disagree with his anti-immigrant rhetoric and are appalled by his aggressive nationalist stance?
Next week, as part of a one-week mission to the United States, I will be invited to the White House by President Trump. We will hold a bilateral meeting as part of that visit. President Trump is the head of Government of the United States, I am head of Government of Ireland and we are two countries which have very strong links. They are cultural - they run in our blood, most of us have American family and many Americans have Irish family - and they are economic. They are extremely important and I want to maintain and strengthen them. They will outlast any president or Taoiseach and it is important that we see everything through that perspective.
There are many of Donald Trump's policies with which I do not agree. I do not agree with him on migration, climate change or trade. I am very much a supporter of free trade and the politics of Donald Trump are much closer to those of Deputy Paul Murphy on that particular issue. I also believe very strongly in individual freedom, which encompasses women's right and the rights of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.
Of course I intend to use the opportunity of the meeting I will have with President Trump, his Administration and the vice president to deal with and raise some of those issues, specifically those relating to trade. I shall point out to the President the extent to which our relationship is truly bilateral. It is not well known but nearly 100,000 Americans across 50 states work for Irish companies. Trade goes in both directions and free trade and free enterprise benefit both countries immeasurably. I shall speak with the President about this in great detail.
The direct answer to the Deputy's question is that one can take two different approaches to these things. The traditional approach of the left and the far left to people they do not agree with is the policy of no platform, not talking to them, not sharing a platform with them and maybe just shouting at them. It has never really worked. The Government I lead will pursue a policy of engagement.
I do not think the Taoiseach understands the politics of the left-----
Perhaps the Deputy will enlighten us.
-----and the differences that exist between our approach and that of Donald Trump. Perhaps the simplest thing is to remind the Taoiseach of his own politics and what he said previously. On 27 June the Taoiseach said:
I have not yet had the phone call with President Trump but I am fairly sure that at some point in my interactions with him, assuming we are both still in office next March, we will be discussing LGBT rights. I will not shirk from raising issues such as climate change, LGBT rights and so on with President Trump.
A week before that, referring to meetings in March, the Taoiseach said, "I will absolutely include in those meetings discussions of the issues he mentioned, whether it be climate change, human rights, LGBT rights and the need to respect Muslim people". Will the Taoiseach clarify if he will discuss those issues with President Trump? Will the Taoiseach discuss the issues of LGBT rights and the issue of the so-called wall?
The Deputy's time is up.
Will the Taoiseach discuss President Trump's anti-Muslim policies? Will the Taoiseach raise those issues with President Trump?
I will raise with President Trump the issues as listed by the Deputy earlier, which I had said I would raise.
The Taoiseach did not.
The Taoiseach had not said he would raise those.
That concludes Leaders' Questions and on time, so congratulations to all Members.