I ask Deputy Kelly to withdraw this amendment for a number of reasons. We are giving out about things being added onto this Bill. Here is another important issue being added on at this Stage. I do not agree with the amendment. As much of a nuisance as it is going in and out of this Dáil on many an occasion, I do not agree we should curb civil liberties and the right to protest late at night without proper discussion in this Dáil. This would introduce something that would remove any form of intimidation which can be interpreted in lots of ways. We are here in a disgraceful situation - and it is not the Deputy’s fault, it is the Minister’s fault – where there are survivors of sexual and gender-based violence in the Gallery tonight. They have been campaigning for a year and have spoken to the justice committee. I was told by the Taoiseach earlier today that they would have their issues heard. He said extra time had been added on but it added on extra time to other issues but not this issue. There are very important issues under discussion here, and I am not blaming any Deputy for raising them, but we are going to be in a situation that, unless the Minister agrees now to extend this debate, survivors will leave this Chamber with this Bill rammed through without any of their amendments heard, without the Rape Crisis Centre’s amendments heard and lots of other issues. I think that is an absolute shame and it would send a horrifically bad message out about how this Government treats the issue of gender-based violence. I need to jump in now and support the call for the Order of Business to be changed. This is an absolute disgrace. I have never seen anything like it in my years in the Dáil.
Sentiment score: -0.00
How much time is left?
Sentiment score: 0.00
Okay.
Sentiment score: 0.23
How much time have we got left?
Sentiment score: 0.00
There are other Deputies who wish to speak.
Sentiment score: 0.40
The situation is disgraceful that we are in. We are rushing and rushing on very important things. Everybody has already raised, including Deputy Carthy and others, about how important this issue was to the justice committee. This should not be happening. It is disgraceful. I have not seen a Bill being pushed through with so many different things in it in this way at this time. It could have been extended. I have been here for other debates that went on for much longer. I acknowledge the survivors who are in the Gallery tonight, including Hazel Bean, Paula Doyle and Sophie Brady. Hazel and Paula in particular have been campaigning on this. Telling the story does not do justice. They have campaigned in a real way in so many different forums. Paula, for example, was recognised by the Irish Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy. Hazel testified to the justice committee but has campaigned and organised protests, photo stunts, press conferences and so on. Sophie, I hope she does not mind me saying, has not attended therapy because this law exists. That is shocking and disgraceful that a young woman cannot avail of something because of how it might be used against her in trial. People are having to choose between trial or therapy. Unfortunately, with the changes that Minister proposes, that still exists because the chilling effect is still there. I wish to mention people who are not here and many who have been here before and packed out the Gallery: Lisa Marie, another survivor who has done a huge amount of work on this, and in particular, a therapist, Bairbre Kelly, who has paved the way in raising this in the professional bodies. Therapists and psychologists right until today have made a statement that the Minister's changes do not go far enough and he has not dealt with the issue at all. There are three options in front of us tonight but we do not have adequate time to debate them. There is the Minister's option, there is a total ban as advocated in my motion and another Sinn Féin motion, and then there are attempts by pretty much all of us to mitigate the damage that the Minister's proposal is still inflicting on complainants by asking the Minister to do what he promised to do, which is to put in a presumption of non-disclosure written into the law to make it much stronger. All the survivors have asked for that if the Bill is not going to ban it totally. There should be warnings issued by judges. Therapy is not evidence and these notes should have a massive health warning in any trial. I want to deal with some of the issues. The Minister launched the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre's annual report which showed a massive increase in calls. All of the service organisations say the same. They are people who have made contact, but there are so many people who do not report anything, do not talk to anybody and do not pursue a legal case. One of the reasons is because of this type of situation that is hostile, intimidating and retraumatising and where their own personal thoughts can be used against them by the person who did the most horrific crime to them. There is no doubt about it that character references are another major problem. Nearly every survivor has come out from court and named this as being something that should be changed. In Tasmania, which is an Australian state, they have a total ban where the complainant must give their consent. That is another thing that the Minister is removing with his proposal. We all that there was a problem with the waiver, but he is taking away agency completely. He is taking away the right to say "No" to having a complainant's notes being handed over. He is passing it directly over to a judge who, by the way, is not trained in analysing therapy notes, how therapy works - the fluid way that it works - and the way people can potentially say things that could be seized upon. He is also not introducing very high bars. I will run through some of the key things that the proposal does not deal with. The explicit presumption of non-disclosure should have been written in. The Bill does not require the accused to engage with the facts of the case at application stage. It is very loose to have that it might be relevant to an issue in the case. The Minister has put in a real risk of an unfair trial, but then has watered it down with this huge proposal of in the interests of justice, which any decent lawyer is going to argue exists. He continues the violating practice of raw counselling records and notes being handed to teams of lawyers and the accused. The Minister could have put huge barriers in the way. He promised to do that, but it is still not done. The system he is bringing in seems to mirror the Canadian model, a system whereby there is a mandatory hearing for every single case. That is currently being reformed due to the damage that it has been found to have done to survivors. It is worth mentioning, and it is just a statement of fact - I am not going to comment on the trial as I do not want to impinge on the outcome of it - that counselling notes have been used in the Donaldson trial in the North. That just speaks to how these notes are being used all the time. I obviously cannot say too much more about it; I do not want to effect it in any way. How damaging that is for any complainant who might be a victim of child sexual abuse is unbelievable. The Minister says a total ban is impossible. I believe there are other contending rights. Let us look at having a referendum in this country because we cannot continue to have a system that traumatises survivors.
Sentiment score: -0.08
My amendment allows for that.
Sentiment score: 0.00
People can consent to give their notes.
Sentiment score: 0.23