Éamon Ó Cuív Questions Need for Safe Access Zones Bill
Éamon Ó Cuív spoke on 5 Jul 2023 about a bill to create safe access zones around hospitals and clinics, arguing the legislation is unnecessary and risks unintended consequences. He questioned whether existing public order laws already cover protest conduct and cited a September 2019 letter from Garda Commissioner Drew Harris stating current legislation was adequate.
Main objections
He said nobody should be hassled attending a doctor's clinic or hospital, but asked whether the State already has powers to stop harassment. He emphasised the basic rule of law that new legislation should be introduced only when necessary and warned every law brings potential unintended consequences and restrictions.
Free protest and equality of enforcement
He raised practical concerns about how the bill would treat different protests - for example, whether a pro-amend march or a pro-life march passing clinics or hospitals would be criminalised for trying to persuade people. He argued the essence of protest is persuasion and questioned where the bill draws the line on lawful protest behaviour.
Abortion, conscience and public opinion
He described abortion as a complex issue and said, drawing on opinion polling, the population could be divided into three thirds: those broadly favouring liberal access, those favouring legal access with restrictions, and those who oppose abortion as the killing of a fetus. He said each person should follow their conscience and expressly noted his respect for Deputy Patrick's beliefs while holding different views.
Legislative scrutiny and process
He urged the House not to rush the bill, calling for detailed, line-by-line scrutiny and committee consideration. He said careful examination is needed to avoid creating precedents that could restrict other forms of protest and to prevent unintended consequences from hastily enacted law.
Motivation and necessity questioned
He suggested the measure may be designed more to satisfy a lobby group than to address a real problem, noting that the Garda Commissioner had reportedly advised the Minister the exclusion zones were redundant because no criminality had been observed. He warned against granting powers that enforcement authorities themselves did not see as necessary.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Hiro, with your coole, you are a family member, and I can now do it. I hope I will do it in the direction of that and i'll be sure that is the person that lives. In this country, it's a hard growing in the region, such as they start to see the world now in the future. And it was a very good time in the future. But I think I'm going to go to the future in the future to get to the future. I'm going to go to the future and I'm going to go to the future. And I think that's what I want to do is the future of the future. I had to tell him that he was going through the future and the future and the future of the future. But he came into the future and went to the future, and I really wanted to get to the future. The issue of abortion is quite a complex issue, and as I said in Irish, you could divide the population into three thirds. Those that believe that abortion is a legitimate and correct thing to do, with very, very little restriction whatsoever, and I think they are about a third, according to opinion polls in the Irish Times, a third that believe that abortion should be legal but with restrictions, and a third who would oppose abortion if abortion's purpose is, as said in the Act, for the purpose of killing the fetus. In other words, the argument about the life of the mother does not arise in a case like that, because if the purpose is to save the mother, it is not abortion according to the Act. Each person to their own conscience, each person to their own beliefs. I think it is important that I respect Deputy Patrick's beliefs, which would not be shared by me. I would also hope that she can share my deep concern for what I consider to be human life. Now, we are not here to debate abortion in itself, but we are here to debate a bill about safe access zones, and there are a number of wider issues that arise here. I do not know if this is the first time, and maybe the Minister could advise me, that we have brought in legislation outlawing, no matter how peaceful it is, certain types of protester actions, but allowing any other action you want to take in terms of protest outside the same buildings. Let us give an example. What happens if, for argument's sake, there is a pro-amend law to liberalise it, a march in Dublin, which is trying to persuade people to allow more abortion, and a march is down Dublin, and a march has passed a whole lot of medical clinics. Is that going to be breaking the law? If they had a pro-life march downtown, arguing for the same, in other words, for the opposite, but arguing over the same subject, will that be? Well, where in the law does it say that if you are trying to persuade something, so they are holding banners up saying, protect human life, don't have an abortion, and so on, and so on, which is trying to persuade people, that is what the whole idea of protest is. It is coming past maybe hospitals, but more definitely past clinics. The second thing, I think, is the basic rule of law, and nothing to do with the specific issue, is that I think you bring in law if you are advised that there is a need for the law. Is it correct that in September 2019, Garda Commissioner Drew Harris wrote to the then Minister for Health, to advise that the existing public order legislation is adequate to deal with the kind of protest witnessed at hospitals and clinics to date? And that the introduction of exclusion zones would be redundant because of the existing current laws and the fact that no incident of criminality has been reported or observed. That is the second basic principle that I would always say about law, is that do not introduce it if it is not necessary, because every law has unintended consequences and restrictions. I absolutely agree that nobody should be hassled going to a doctor's clinic or going to a hospital or whatever. There is no question about that, but the question is, do they not have the power already to stop that? But the reality is, if you take, for example, all the doctor's clinics in the country, nobody knows what anybody is going into the clinic for. There was talk about rural clinics, but certainly in my experience at the rural clinic, nobody knows your business. They might know you, but they would not know your business if you went in to see the doctor. Therefore, the idea that people could be targeted, because it seems to me that this law was written with abortion clinics in mind, a la derangement of Britain. So I do think that we need to tease this bill out. I hope that you will not try to rush it through the House. I have always had a fetish about rushed legislation of any type. I think it is a very bad habit. I would hope we would take a very detailed look at this, go through it line by line, now that we have the legislation, and that you will bring it into committee, and that whatever time needs to be taken will be taken, so that we do not have a whole lot of unintended consequences and bad precedents in relation to other forms of protest over other things that this might be used as a precedent for. I have to say that I do think that this is more to satisfy a lobby group than to solve a real problem existing in society. Because as I said, it would appear that the Gordy do not think that they need this power, and they are always looking for power, as you and I know.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
