What is the Taoiseach's response to the initial observations of the Human Rights Commission appointed by the Government on the proposal of the Government to proceed with the referendum on citizenship? The Human Rights Commission has expressed concern about the Government proceeding with this poll on 11 June without any consultation with the commission. The commission has also expressed concern about the implications for the Belfast Agreement and stated that it is meeting its corresponding body in Belfast today and will make further observations on the implications for the Good Friday Agreement after that meeting.

I want to draw the Taoiseach's attention in particular to the commission's conviction that the amendment may breach the rights of Irish born children under two different international human rights treaties and will create a new category of non-citizens with a lower level of protection, that the Government had not given serious and comprehensive consideration to the human rights consequences of the referendum, that the data provided by the Government to justify the amendment is weak and that "much of the evidence and rationalisation for the proposed amendment seems vague or anecdotal in nature".

High-handed intellectual bullying is not a sufficient response to the concerns raised by the Human Rights Commission. Would it not be better to adjourn the Committee Stage tonight to allow for consultation and consideration on such a sensitive issue, to consider, as the commission put it, whether other means of addressing any purported social need have been adequately explored which would not have the same detrimental effect on human rights? If the Taoiseach will not listen to the Opposition or to the SDLP, will he respond to the Human Rights Commission established by his own Government?

The House set up the Human Rights Commission but the Government appointed it. I would, therefore, always listen to what it says and examine its views. In that regard, I have discussed the matter with the Attorney General. He assures me, and the Government is satisfied, that Ireland is not in breach of any laws or of the British-Irish Agreement. That is the legal position. As Deputy Rabbitte knows, the issue of citizenship is for the people of a country or the Legislature to deal with. It is a political matter.

It is my understanding that the Human Rights Commission has given what it calls an initial view on the Government's proposal and we will carefully examine that. This dealt with a number of issues, some of which are human rights related.

On Deputy Rabbitte's contention that a new category of non-citizen would be created which would somehow have less constitutional protection than citizens' children, let me make two points. First, the commission's initial report does not indicate which aspects of constitutional protection will be denied to these children. Second, it has not dealt with the reality that there are relatively many non-national children and adults here and there is no evidence that the fundamental rights of all of these people who are working and contributing to our economy, participating in schooling or in our communities are somehow less protected under law than the rights of our own citizens. We heard of a case the other night on RTE's "Prime Time" in which employers are in breach of the law, but that is not our constitutional position. In any event these and other issues can be discussed comprehensively during the debate.

On the point raised by Deputy Rabbitte, the Government is satisfied that Ireland is not in breach of any laws or of the British-Irish Agreement. I have answered Mr. Mark Durkan comprehensively, and the declaration put forward by the two Governments comprehensively deals with that issue.

The Taoiseach is correct in stating that these were the initial observations of the commission. However, the commission was not consulted. It is working within the same timeframe as the rest of us. The chairman of the commission wrote to the Minister and it was only then that he was invited to give his views.

Everything the Taoiseach has said confirms me in two views. First, despite the appeal from a broad cross-section of moderate opinion, the Taoiseach is determined to proceed on 11 June and, second, he is doing so for narrow electoral advantage and for no other reason. The Taoiseach knows how potent a force this is in communities where, for example, the queues for housing are lengthening every day. The Taoiseach understands that. I am not saying that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform know or understands that — the barristers and friends of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform are not on the housing list. However, in communities where so many people are on the housing list, this is a potent force and it is wrong for the Taoiseach to use it in an electoral context. There are some matters on which we do not play politics. Despite the ups and downs of the Northern Ireland peace process, nobody on this side of the House has ever made life difficult for the Taoiseach on that issue.

Unlike the other way around.

Similarly, this issue should not be resorted to for narrow electoral gain when there is no urgency about it and when bodies like the Irish Human Rights Commission and many academics, political parties such as the SDLP, Mr. Bruce Morrison and others have said that we should take time to consider the nature of the problem and address it with as much consensus as possible.

Let me make two points. It is not my intention to be in any way rancorous. There is no need to turn this issue into a political battle. On the first point, the Human Rights Commission has been requested to give its views on the legislation and its preliminary view on this report should be seen as such. The commission has not been asked to give its views on the constitutional amendment because that is a political matter. However, if it makes any comments on the legislation the Minister will examine them.

On the second matter, Deputy Rabbitte is right. We know what difficulties might arise for Irish society in the future because of people coming to this country. I do not believe we have a difficulty. There are schools in Tallaght, in Deputy Rabbitte's constituency, and in the inner city, in my constituency, which have children from several countries. There are people from different countries living in our communities. People distinguish between the nationalities they like and those they do not like. They form their own views on that, but they do so in a low-key way and there is no great hatred, bitterness or racism in our society. There is no necessity for it. I took a chance six years ago in stating that I did not envisage difficulty.

People wonder why people from southern Nigeria and elsewhere bypass Brussels, London and Paris and come here. When I spoke with the President and Foreign Minister of Nigeria last year they told me — I did not ask them — that it was well known around the world that our citizenship laws were easy game. They wondered why we did not tighten our laws, why we had loosened them, when everyone else was tightening them. When I had this debate with Deputy Quinn, I looked at the letters and he pointed out the problem to me, as did the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue.

Is the Government making the right interpretation of it?

Just a few hundred people were coming in at that stage. It was not an issue when we had a calm discussion about it at that time. I do not think we need to get ourselves in a knot about this matter. Our citizenship laws are too loose and we need to tighten them somewhat. In my speech last week, I tried to point out five categories. Our citizenship laws remain significantly more liberal than those elsewhere. I outlined the categories last week in the plainest English. They are massively more liberal. Frankly, I do not see any political advantage and I will not campaign by saying anything about the Labour Party or anybody else who takes a different view. I will not do that because I just do not see it.

I have already heard ugly things from some of the Taoiseach's canvassers, which I will personally relate to him.

I appreciate that. Nobody mentioned this issue when I was in Deputy Rabbitte's constituency last week. There are many issues, but this is not an important issue for many people. It is a matter of sorting out our citizenship laws, which are too loose — they will remain much looser than those elsewhere — and it is no more than that. I do not see any reason to engage in contention on the matter. We need to correct this problem now. The relevant figures are available. I do not want to engage in a rant about the figures because to do so would be to hype it up and I will try my best to avoid it.

Why will the Government not hold the referendum in October? There would be no trouble then.