Sinn Féin’s claim to have opposed Hate Speech bill doesn’t stand up to scrutiny

Sinn Féin have clearly been “triggered” by the stalling of the “Hate Bill.”

Having supported the legislation, and even tabled amendments to make it even more restrictive, Sinn Féin has belatedly attempted to pose as critical of the Bill which now looks as if it may be placed in cold storage.

Longford Sinn Féin representative, James Donnelly, was quick to the defence of the Party in response to those who were pointing to Sinn Féin’s record on the Bill.

The stalling of the Bill has been due to the opposition of a small number of opposition TDs and Senators and critics within the broader civil society.

Gript can rightly claim to have been not only one of the few media outlets to report on all of this, but to have played some part in bringing about the current political developments particularly through the questioning of Government ministers by Ben Scallan and his research into the public submissions on the legislation.

Sinn Féin made it clear all along up to this point that they support the legislation which they voted to approve in the Dáil.

And yet, on June 21, Sinn Féin Senator Niall Ó Donnghaile issued a lengthy statement which claimed that Sinn Féin had attempted to amend the Bill in order to “strike the difficult balance between freedom of expression and inclusion.” The record of Sinn Féin at crucial stages in the debate and legislative process contradicts this.

Sinn Féin Senator Paul Gavan’s claim on June 13 – as the extent of opposition to the Bill became apparent – that: “In previous Stages in the Dáil debate, Sinn Féin Members have outlined that while we support the principle of the Bill, we have some grave reservations about some of its provisions. These primarily relate to the demonstration motivation test; section 10 on the presumption of innocence when material likely to incite hatred is possessed; and the sections on public order offences. We, along with other parties, moved a number of key amendments related to these issues of concern and it is a matter of regret that the Government has failed to address these matters through accepting amendments or moving any of its own.”

That, to put it mildly, simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

If anything, the small number of Sinn Féin amendments – just 12 of the 95 which is pretty pathetic for what is by far the largest opposition party – were designed to strengthen the Bill and to widen its scope by suggesting amending sections to include the term “presumed characteristics.”

In fact, amendments 4 and 12 proposed by Sinn Féin at Committee Stage proposed to add “migration status” as one of the protected characteristics.

Amendment 12 even suggested that someone might be liable for prosecution on the grounds that they might have made “references to persons seeking international, protection, persons with refugee status, persons with permission to remain and persons with either regular or irregular migrant status.”

The latter meaning that someone might have their collar felt by Old Bill if they were accused of having incited hatred against someone who is not even legally entitled to be in the country.

The debate itself in which seven Sinn Féin TDs participated was notable for their almost complete failure to engage with or even directly refer to sections of the Bill which they would have you believe they attempted to amend.

All of the Sinn Féin TDs who spoke referred to the NGOs who can not only claim much of the credit for there having been a Bill to restrict freedom of speech in the first instance, but which same NGOs clearly not only framed many of the amendments from all sides but probably provided not an insignificant number of TDs and Senators with their talking points.

Several Sinn Féin TDs referred to the role of one Lucy Michael in pushing all of this on behalf of the NGO racism sector.  Lucy was once a paid employee of the British state. That anyone claiming to be an Irish republican ought to be taking political direction from someone who once worked for Whitehall speaks volumes for where Sinn Féin is at these times.

And to top it all when the Bill came to Committee Stage, the Shinners withdrew most of their amendments on the basis of assurances from the Minister.

When the Bill came back for Report Stage on April 26, there were no amendments from Sinn Féin and all of the Sinn Fein TDs present voted along with the Government to approve of it, as amended.

Their new-found opposition should be fooling no-one.

As can be seen from the vote, the only opposition to the Bill in that crucial vote were Independents, Aontú leader Peadar Toíbín, and People Before Profit.  If Sinn Féin have now done a volte face on the proposed legislation then that is to be welcomed.

It does not, however, disguise the fact that once again when the state was proposing to introduce restrictions on civil liberties, that Sinn Féin were not only supportive of the Government but, as during the Covid Panic, were demanding even greater restrictions.

Their contributions to the legislative process have also once against proved that they are not up to the task of being a credible opposition, never mind having claims on forming part of the next Government.