Book Offer
This will close in 10 seconds
If even the politicians who are signing off on a law don’t really understand its purpose, then how are the general public supposed to follow it?
That’s a question I tried to get to the bottom of this week, when I asked Taoiseach Leo Varadkar about controversial comments made by his government’s senators in relation to Ireland’s upcoming hate speech bill. And while some in government have repeatedly assured us that this bill will be very moderate and reasonable, other government legislators seem to have a very different take on the matter.
Last week Gript reported how one government senator, Pauline O’Reilly, bragged that the government’s hate speech bill is about “restricting freedom for the common good,” and censoring views on gender identity if those views create “discomfort.”
"We are restricting freedom for the common good": Irish Green Party Senator Pauline O'Reilly says that her government's hate speech bill is about "restricting freedom," and censoring views on gender identity if those views create "discomfort."#gript pic.twitter.com/H7QIT0QHmf
— gript (@griptmedia) June 15, 2023
These comments naturally went internationally viral for all the wrong reasons, accruing millions of impressions on social media at home and abroad.
Irish politician boasts hate speech bill will ‘restrict freedom’ to protect trans people from ‘discomfort’ https://t.co/p8pBOgbCXb
— Fox News (@FoxNews) June 16, 2023
In a similar vein, during the same debate, another government senator named Joe O’Reilly said that violent attacks on minorities often start with “jokes,” thus implying that jokes could be considered a form of hate speech.
Irish Senator Joe O'Reilly defends his government's hate speech bill by arguing that violent attacks on minorities often start with "jokes."#gript pic.twitter.com/XmpPqgnECF
— gript (@griptmedia) June 16, 2023
Now, if there are government senators indicating that the hate speech bill is about restricting “freedom” and “jokes,” then there are only two possibilities: either they’re right, which is alarming, or they don’t understand the legislation they’re voting on, which is alarming for different reasons.
And so, this week, I asked the Taoiseach which it was. He seemed to claim it was the latter.
“Anyone who thinks that the legislation on incitement to hatred and hate crime is about banning jokes really hasn’t read the legislation,” Varadkar replied, adding that freedom of expression was protected in the law.
"I didn't hear the remarks": Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar denies seeing comments by government senators who said that the hate speech bill is about "restricting freedom" and implying that "jokes" could be hate speech. #gript pic.twitter.com/QmOjeHq3Qm
— gript (@griptmedia) June 20, 2023
“This is about people whose intent is to do harm, and to engage in actions and activities and in speech that is designed to cause harm to other people. And that’s not the same thing as expressing your opinion or telling a joke.”
He later added that he hadn’t heard the comments specifically being referred to, so he couldn’t comment on them in detail, but that he was “confident” that the senators would vote for the legislation in the end.
Contained within that response, of course, is the admission that nobody could have read the bill and come to the conclusion that the senators did. So either the Taoiseach is wrong, or the senators voting on the bill are wrong. Either way, it doesn’t exactly instil great confidence in the standard of the legislative scrutiny, does it? Why does it seem like members of the government that actually wrote the law and that are voting for it aren’t able to agree amongst themselves about what it actually says?
In fact, Varadkar’s comments contradict remarks made by Justice Minister Helen McEntee during her address to senators last week. During his response, the Taoiseach said that the bill was only about stopping individuals whose “intent” was to do harm, and those who speak in a way that is “designed” to cause harm to others.
But last week, McEntee specifically said that you could accidentally fall afoul of this law, without intent, by being “reckless”:
So the Taoiseach says it’s all about intent, while the Justice Minister says you don’t need intent to be found guilty. The Taoiseach says it has nothing to do with banning jokes or restricting freedom, while government senators who are voting on the legislation beg to differ. One way or another, much of the government doesn’t seem to understand the law they’re voting for.
You know it’s a bad sign when Senators are making comments so shocking that the best defence the leader of the country can muster is ‘They obviously haven’t read the bill they’re going to be passing.’ If that’s true, this country may be in even bigger trouble than we previously realised.
This will close in 10 seconds