Mattie McGrath: Exclusion Zone Bill Undermines Protests
Mattie McGrath spoke on 11 Jul 2023 about the Exclusion Zone Bill, arguing it threatens civil liberties and undermines independent protest. He contended the measure is disproportionate, would restrict where people may march and risks criminalising ordinary participants.
Lack of scrutiny and proportionality
McGrath said the Bill received little scrutiny during debate and accused many speakers of going off-topic. He challenged claims by supporters that the Bill strikes a balance, asking directly whether the restrictions are truly proportional given their impact on civil liberties.
Impact on pro-life protests
He argued the Government's approach allows pro-life protesters to be tolerated only in tightly controlled areas, which he said destroys the independence of citizen-led marches. Drawing on a map he cited, McGrath said exclusion zones blot out large areas of Dublin and used O'Connor Street as an example of where a march could be constrained; he also said he had recently marched with a pro-life group and praised Nevy Brin and their organisation.
Legal penalties and authoritarian warning
McGrath warned that entering an exclusion zone could expose participants to penalties of up to six months' imprisonment and said such restrictions on expression are "characteristic of an authoritarian regime." He also argued there is already legislation to prevent harassment and cited the commissioner and others who, he said, told the Government there was no need for this new law.
Critique of repeal review and safeguards
He criticised the handling of the repeal legislation and its review, calling the review a "sham" and accusing the Government of breaking promises and misleading voters. McGrath condemned proposals to remove the three-day waiting period, describing it as one of the remaining protections for the unborn and saying the Government was ignoring safeguards while expanding abortion provision.
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.
During last week's debate, the Exclusion Zone Bill unfortunately did not receive any scrutiny, although it had a dramatic impact on civil liberties. Most speakers went on long tangents. One speaker even trailed off to talking about some things that happened 30 years ago. Supporters of the Bill have claimed that it strikes a balance and is proportional. But is it proportional? The Government claims that it would impede on people's right to protest, because pro-life protesters will still be tolerated outside the house. Which is great. But if protests are being restricted to a single controlled area dictated by the Government, their independence is completely undermined. The Government is choosing who protests and where you protest. From a map I have received, provided it is clear that the exclusion zones blot out a tremendous amount of area in Dublin, city centre and elsewhere. A pro-life protest would be printed from marching from one end of O'Connor Street to the other. That is quite simple. I proudly marched for O'Connor Street last Saturday week with the pro-life group, and I complimented Nevy Brin and their organisation for holding it. Denying that this would be the outcome of the law is simply not his intention, that is not good enough. That is the unintended, or probably intended, pro-rightly intention of this Bill. Thousands of people attend pro-life marches each year, including many elected representatives. Protests and marches should be citizen-led. They should not be merely tolerated, so long as they confirm the arbitrary restrictions seen by the Government. That would not happen in Churchesco's time. God's sake, who do you think you are? I know you are carrying away with yourself. If a march was to enter one of these exclusion zones dotted around the country, participants, innocent citizens, would face up to six months' imprisonment. Placing restrictions on citizens' ability to express their views as they please is characteristic of an authoritarian regime. I said that. Where are you going to put all these people? You can't put the criminals in jail and the drug dealers. But, love of God, please someone have a bit of common sense here. I know you don't have it. You don't express it. You made huge promises here at the time this Bill was brought in, the repeal legislation, safe, legal and rare. Sorry, I mean, God, and one in every seven. It's horrific. And you talked in about, Deputy Gould was talking about a lady, he listened to your story. The review of that legislation that carried out there, the sham review, where you did an interview one person who decided to save a life rather than any life. Not one did the so-called independent person. It stinks to the high heaven. For all the talk of stopping harassment, it seems to me this law would only enable harassment, harassment by the guarantee of ordinary people expressing their pro-life views in their own country. When you consider that a total of voters opposed the box five years ago, and many more are sorry that they didn't, because they were misled and blatantly lied to by the government. And then you didn't bring in any safety measures that you said you would, but you want to take away the three-day waiting period. The only bit of protection the vulnerable unborn has. So, Minister, I say shame on you. So, the idea that this law is being introduced to stop people from engaging in actions like blocking doorways or harassing people, that's totally untrue. There's ample legislation to protect, to stop people from doing that. The commissioner and all the other gathered have told you that there's no need for this legislation. They stay on the Statement book, but you're in a mad frenzy, a bloodlust, that you can't get enough abortions, and you can't have enough people and services, and you're going to force all the hospitals to deliver it, and you're going to stop anybody from saying anything. This is a democratic country that you elected to. I think you're elected the 16-count on月—or was the 16-count? The Deputy Attorney General General, when you treat the truth then it's difficult. No, no, please now. The Deputy Attorney General, I'm asking Godotty for your clarification about that. I heard as well as anyone what we were told, but it is not appropriate to make those personal charges. I see elected the 15-16 count, what's wrong with that? No, nothing about that.
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.
