Katherine Zappone in Office
Links: 1 Prioritising LGBT Activism // 2 Weakening Parents // 3 Criminalising “Hate Crime”

With the 2020 general election campaign in full swing, Katherine Zappone is portraying herself as a candidate of many issues. For instance, housing, fair tax, disability services and drug addiction strategy. On canvas in Rathfarnham in January 2020, Zappone’s canvas leader Clare Murphy stated: “The main issues that are coming up…on every doorstep really are just housing and health.”

Zappone was Minister for Children and Youth Affairs from 2016 to 2020.

However, the best test of Zappone’s real priorities is to examine what she focused on while in office. The Minister spent 3-and-a-half years at the Department of Children and Youth Affairs on Baggot Street Lower.

Amid the myriad of problems and challenges facing the children of Ireland, what did Zappone select as particularly pressing? The drug epidemic? Educational disadvantage? Spiraling child homelessness? Rather, for Zappone, it was promotion of LGBT which regularly took centre-stage. Other emphases included the weakening of parental power and a push to criminalise “homophobia” and “hate crime”.

Three highlights of Zappone’s tenure as Minister for Children and Youth Affairs seemed to be: (i) Promoting LGBT with a dedicated Strategy at a cost to the taxpayer of €400,000; (ii) Weakening the power of parents by mandating subjective reporting by teachers; and (iii) Pushing to criminalise “homophobia” with no clear regard to religious expression.

Zappone’s salary entitlement before leaving office was €175,699 as a Minister and was due to rise to €179,213 by 2021.

Top of Page

1. Prioritising LGBT activism: the LGBTI+ National Youth Strategy 2018
The LGBTI+ National Youth Strategy of Katherine Zappone
LGBTI+ National Youth Strategy

Perhaps the main strategy which Zappone has championed as government minister is the LGBTI+ National Youth Strategy 2018-2020. A flagship publication, no other strategy produced by Zappone has received as much media attention and promotion. Just six months into her tenure as Minister, Zappone affirmed that she was lavishly funding LGBT. “In the recent Budget I secured €400,000 to underpin the LGBT strategy as well as €57m for youth projects across the country“.

The professionally designed document involved an Oversight Committee and Youth Advisory Group put in place by Zappone’s Department. Also funded were an Environmental Scan and a Youth Consultation, the latter involving 7 events around Ireland. Meanwhile, the final document produced ran to over 40 pages and proposed almost 70 key actions.

Top of Page

The context: Zappone boasts of LGBT strategy as child homelessness rises

Zappone’s LGBTI+ Strategy is a copious document. The Oversight Committee chaired by Una Mullally oversaw the Strategy, which was well funded and meticulously planned.

In addition, Katherine Zappone flagged the Strategy herself as one of particular significance. In her foreword, the Minister for Children was clear. “I am delighted to present the first Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Intersex (LGBTI+) National Youth Strategy in Ireland and the world.” Likewise, journalist Una Mullally was effusive in her introduction: “This Strategy is a world first”. Mullally continued on in her introduction to target faith-based schools. “The dominance of religious patronage in Irish schools can present challenges for LGBTI+ young people.”

a homeless man on the street reflecting rising homelessness under Katherine Zappone
The number of homeless families increased by over 300% between November 2014 and November 2019.

However, Zappone’s LGBTI+ Strategy came at a time when homelessness figures were exploding. To clarify, Focus Ireland noted that in November 2019 there were 1,685 families accessing emergency accommodation. This figure included 3,752 children. The charity further observed that the number of homeless families had increased by over 300% since November 2014. Nevertheless, since assuming office in May 2016, promoting LGBTI+ has been at the heart of Zappone’s policy making.

Top of Page // Top of Section

The philosophy: particular attention for LGBT

The Strategy’s underlying philosophy appears to be that those who identify as LGBT require particular attention and representation. Notably, recently elected MEP Maria Walsh also appears to subscribe to this philosophy. Walsh, when asked by Erica Bracken in April 2018, “Do you think there is still a long way to go to achieve equality in LGBT rights in Ireland?” declared “I believe we as a community have immense work to do.” Back in 2015, LGBT activists assured people of religious convictions that “marriage equality” was all they wanted. Now, it appears this was just the beginning.

Throughout Zappone’s Strategy, “LGBTI+ young people” are consistently represented as victims. Little statistical evidence is adduced to support this assumption.

LGBT as victims

Throughout Zappone’s Strategy, “LGBTI+ young people” are consistently represented as victims. Victims who are bullied, harassed, discriminated against, stigmatised, isolated and excluded (p.10). Little statistical evidence is adduced to support this assumption. Rather, almost 70 key actions are justified by a consultative process which included an “online survey” (p.10). Various Government Departments including An Garda Síochána, ETBs, HEIs and a score of other public sector bodies are mandated to promote LGBT in Irish society.

One such action is listed for the Department of Education and Skills. “Review the feasibility of including provision for gender-neutral/single stall bathrooms and changing rooms in the design guidelines for schools.” (10(a), p.25). However, there is no discussion of the proposed cost. This action proposes that the approximately 3,300 primary and 730 secondary schools in Ireland provide single stall bathrooms. In short, all in the name of facilitating transgenderism.

Top of Page // Top of Section

The effect: an attack on religious patronage and religious profession

One of the clearest aspects of the document is its hostility to disapproval, real or imagined, of the LGBT lifestyle. This is particularly vivid in two aspects of the document.

Zappone’s Strategy contains repeated negative comments on the religious patronage of schools.

On the one hand, the Strategy contains repeated negative comments on the religious patronage of schools. Goal 1 states: “the religious patronage and/or ethos of schools was cited again and again as problematic for young LGBTI+ people…the impact of unsupportive attitudes towards homosexuality and transgender issues cannot be ignored.” (p.16) Also, Chair Una Mullally comments in her introduction. “The dominance of religious patronage in Irish schools can present challenges for LGBTI+ young people.” (p.vi) This animosity towards religious patronage in education is difficult to ignore.

On the other hand, the document makes an explicit commitment to eradication of “hate crime and hate speech.” Under 8(c) of Goal 1: “Review current legislation to identify if any gaps exist in the areas of hate crime and hate speech. Where gaps exist, they should be corrected.” (p.24) However, the document makes no attempt to clarify whether religious opposition to same-sex marriage constitutes hate speech. As a result, the inclusion of this commitment with its possible implications for those of religious belief is concerning.

Top of Page // Top of Section

2. A weakening of parents amid an overreach of state power

One of the most significant actions Zappone took in office was to commence the Children First Act 2015 legislation. This legislation was passed under the oversight of her predecessor as Minister, Dr James Reilly. James Reilly infamously abolished the defense, for parents, of “Reasonable Chastisement” from the statute books while Minister.

Dr James Reilly, under whose tenure the Children First Act 2015 was passed into legislation
Dr James Reilly (former Minister for Health and Children). Credit: Justin Farrelly, Merrion Street. Used under https://bit.ly/3aHvd4G

Reilly’s move was a first step towards criminalising parents who administer corporal punishment (or a simple slap) to their children. However, the electorate of Dublin Fingal soundly rejected James Reilly in the election of 2016.

Commencing legislation means to bring it into force legally. For instance, an Act may be passed into law but not immediately commenced.

The effect of Zappone’s decision to commence the Children First Act 2015 was profound. Ultimately, her decision caused the balance of power to shift even more decisively away from parents. That is to say, more power was given to the state in everything relating to the rearing and education of children.

Top of Page

Parents increasingly becoming suspects of child abuse

Now, under the euphemisms of “children first” and “child protection”, parents can become prime suspects in all allegations of child abuse.

The Children First Act mandates certain persons to report parents to TUSLA if they believe children are at risk. These mandated persons include teachers. Notably, the grounds for reporting are subjective in the extreme. For example, if teachers observe parents pushing their children into their car a report can be made. Further grounds which mandate teachers to report include “inattention to basic hygiene” on the part of the child. In addition, grounds on the part of parents include “extreme over-protectiveness” and/or “inappropriate non-physical punishments (e.g. locking child in bedroom)” (p. 12-13).

The Guidelines’ definition of harm is not limited to actual harm. Even if “the child’s health, development or welfare …are likely to be seriously affected” a report should be made. To sum up, the Act has the practical effect of rendering almost all parents candidates for referral to TUSLA.

The Children First Act has the practical effect of rendering almost all parents candidates for referral.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Teachers mandated to report under new reporting regime

Zappone’s commencement order has affected both parents and teachers. For instance, her decision has impacted on school staff morale, management priorities, and teacher-parent relationships. This impact has arguably been negative in the extreme. Certainly, the Act has led to an unprecedented number of referrals to TUSLA. Consequently principals, teachers, and parents are feeling the implications of this rise in referrals.

Under the Chld Protection strategy and/or guidelines, principals can show teachers the door on foot of an allegation received
School principals now are obliged to absent a teacher from the school, until they are proven innocent.

Along the way, innocent parents have undergone traumatic investigations by TUSLA. For example, the Irish Times reported in June 2019 that over 10,000 children were referred for suspected emotional abuse in 2018. The rise in referrals “was due in part to the introduction of mandatory reporting of child protection concerns.”

The chilling effect of the legislation commenced by Zappone is to usher in a new reporting regime. Arguably, this approach emulates that of the Stasi of East Germany or KGB (secret police) of the Soviet Union. For example, under the provisions, school principals have power to immediately absent from work any teacher subject to an allegation. (See Appendix 3, page 96). Notably, this is before there has been any establishment of the legitimacy of the allegation. In short, the impression is given that the teacher is guilty until proven innocent.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Right of school ethos to inform provision of sex education threatened

Zappone’s commencement of Children First is not only of concern for individual teachers and parents. In addition, this legislation is designed so as to threaten the ability of school ethos to inform provision of sex education (SPHE).

Section 8.4 of the Child Protection Procedures stipulates that provision of SPHE is now a Child Protection issue. To clarify, this means that a routine Child Protection investigation of a school includes SPHE provision. In other words, Department inspectors will include examination of the provision of sex education.

On inspection, schools can now have their Child Protection status designated as Non-Compliant or Weak. This however, may not be due to legitimate failings but rather ideological ones. For example, a Child Protection status could be downgraded due to students not being able to define “gender identity”.

Zappone’s commencement order means that school principals are now on edge, or to use another phrase “running scared”. Ultimately, it is highly likely that a school with a conservative approach to sex education will now fall foul of the Inspectorate. In short, it could result in an Inspectorate finding that they are failing in their child safeguarding requirements.

Top of Page // Top of Section

TUSLA, the KGB and the new information gathering of the state

Under the process commenced by Zappone, TUSLA has become an investigative powerhouse. In conclusion, unlimited power and increasing amounts of reported information are concentrated in the hands of faceless, nameless state personnel. In more ways than one, this is reminiscent of the KGB secret police, described in 1983 by Time magazine as the “world’s most effective information gathering organisation.”

Under the Children First strategy, TUSLA are in receipt of greatly increased reporting from mandated persons
Unlimited power and increasing amounts of reported information are now concentrated in the hands of TUSLA.

The net effect of the legislation commenced by Zappone has been to strike fear into the hearts of parents.

In addition, Zappone’s action has threatened the trust and good faith between parents, teachers and school management.

With respect to tax credits for employing childminders, Zappone has also come under fire for her policy. On 21 January, Sean O’Rourke challenged Zappone on RTE Radio regarding the issue. O’Rourke put to Zappone that she was not offering “any help to people who do want their child minded by a relative“.

Zappone’s pause and floundering after his question was so pronounced that even the presenter called it out. However, little wonder, when Zappone’s Children First legislation serves to so concretely dis-empower parents. Likewise, little surprise if her childcare policy does the same.

Top of Page // Top of Section

3. Criminalising “Hate Crime” with the National LGBTI+ Inclusion Strategy
The National LGBTI+ Inclusion Strategy launched by Zappone and Charlie Flanagan
The National LGBTI+ Inclusion Strategy

Zappone launched another Strategy towards the end of her Ministerial period: the National LGBTI+ Inclusion Strategy. Although similar in name to the LGBTI+ National Youth Strategy, it is a completely separate document. Zappone launched this Strategy simultaneously with Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan. Launched on Thursday 28 November 2019, it commits the government to over 100 actions promoting LGBT in society.

Zappone and Flanagan had a combined salary of over €350,000 when leaving office in January 2020. Both were expending their energies in promoting LGBT at this crucial time. On 28 November 2019, the Departments of Justice and Children were “promoting equality” for LGBT activists with a publicised launch and copious action plan.

However, within two months of the launch, a child was murdered and dismembered as part of a drug-fuelled feud just a 45 minute drive from Dáil Éireann, a 20-year old student was stabbed to death in Cork, and 3 children had died tragically at a home in Newcastle.

Top of Page

Purpose: tackling crime, or just a tool to report illegitimate grievances?

One prominent provision of the National LGBTI+ Strategy is to “ensure that incitement to hatred and hate crimes against LGBTI+ people are adequately addressed in our laws” (p.25). However, the difficulty with this provision is the complete absence of any attempt to balance it with religious freedom, i.e. the constitutional guarantee of “freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion” (Art. 44.2.1, Irish Constitution).

The hate crime criminalisation strategy is a danger, as there is no regard to balance it with religious freedom
The difficultly with “hate crime” is the complete absence of any attempt to balance it with religious freedom.

Indeed, the Strategy appears to commit the government to attain increased reporting of (anti-LGBT) hate crimes. This appears to be regardless of whether such crimes are actually increasing (or even exist) or not. For example, one key action states: “Significantly increase reporting of hate crimes to An Garda Síochána by members of the LGBTI+ community owing to the more open relationship that has been developed.” (21.4, p. 25).

To sum up, the obvious danger is that such provisions will morph into a right not to be offended. Therein lies the threat, in particular, to freedom of religious expression.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Context: Propagandising of LGBT Issues

Further actions mandated by the Strategy include the following. Firstly, 1.2 visibility: “identify key large-scale events each year to promote LGBTI+ visibility”. Secondly, 1.3 media: develop and implement further actions to support the positive portrayal and representation of LGBTI+ identities in broadcast media”. Thirdly, 1.4 events: coordinate a series of events and communications to support positive messaging around Pride and festivals nationwide and more broadly to promote LGBTI+ visibility, awareness and expertise”. Fourthly, 3.3 toilets: “take practical measures to increase the availability of non-gendered toilets in public buildings”. Also 4.1 research: “develop and implement an LGBTI+ research programme” and 7.4 festival(s):“support a nation-wide week-long LGBTI+ History and Culture Festival in 2020.”

In summary, the Strategy proposes a relentless propagandising of LGBT issues via mandated actions by the government. Not surprisingly, there is no costing whatsoever, or indeed any mention of costing in the document. However, implementing this Strategy will potentially place a tax burden running into hundreds of thousands on taxpayers.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Effect: an attack on free speech and religious freedom?

The provisions in relation to hate crime form a substantial part of the Section 5 of the Action Plan. For instance: “Ireland has strong legislation and supports in place to combat hate crime and encourages people to report it.” (See Safe and Supported, Section 21) In short, no less than 5 actions focus on the legislative provisions and reporting of hate crime.

Hate crime has long been a legislative interest for those with an agenda to quash legitimate opposition and public discourse. Zappone’s Strategy proposes legislation that outlaws “incitement to hatred and hate crimes“. The word incitement is of particular concern. Put simply, it is often interpreted so as to target those who express Christian beliefs on marriage.

“Hate crime” is often interpreted so as to include those who express Christian beliefs on marriage.

Zappone’s close attention to hate crime proposals

Within just two months of her taking office, Zappone was giving attention to hate-crime proposals. On Monday, 11 July 2016 she responded to a request by Rape Crisis Network Ireland for hate crime legislation. Zappone promised she would “particularly attend to the recommendations“. In addition, she declared herself “particularly keen to examine that and to try to move it forward in some way.”

Zappone, in 2016, pronounced that, for many LGBT people “discrimination, bullying and hate are an everyday reality“. However, Zappone made this statement without referencing any specific Irish examples of the same. Rather, she made a vague appeal to research findings on “feelings”. “Research in Ireland does tell us that LGBT young people often feel victimised, discriminated against and isolated”.

Zappone carried on from this statement to a discussion of policy and funding. She noted how she had, at Dublin Pride, confirmed “the first ever LGBT National Youth Strategy“. Moreover, Zappone went on to emphasise the considerable financial resources she had devoted to the cause. “In the recent Budget I secured €400,000 to underpin the LGBT strategy as well as €57m for youth projects across the country.”

Top of Page // Top of Section

The “Homophobia” weapon: a tool of radicals against free speech

Accessing considerable financial resources of the state is more justifiable by Zappone if LGBT are portrayed as victims. Therefore, Zappone’s regular use of the word “homophobia” in her discourse is notable.

Above all, LGBT activists use this word as a weapon to disarm and silence those with Christian beliefs on marriage. In short, using this linguistic weapon is a way in which LGBT activists force those of Christian belief to give official recognition to their lifestyle.

In short, using the word “homophobia” as a weapon is one of ways in which LGBT activists force those of Christian belief to give official recognition to their lifestyle.

While a Senator, prior to her tenure as TD, Zappone made tackling “homophobia” one of her primary concerns. On Tuesday 18 February 2014, RTE reported that Zappone had “introduced a motion noting the importance of having a public debate on issues of free speech [and] homophobia”. In the Seanad, Zappone articulated her desire that “homophobia will some day be wiped out of Irish society“. In addition, she mentioned the need to “change oppressive social, legal, religious and cultural systems“. The linking of homophobia and religious systems is notable.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Making schools “homophobia-free” zones?

Zappone called for concrete action towards the end of her speech. “We also need policies, laws and resources to ensure schools are homophobia-free zones,” she declared. The purpose of her suggestions was to “usher in a new era of freedom in schools“. However, she did not explain her reason for raising schools at this stage in her speech. Could it be that over 95% of Irish primary schools, and the vast majority of secondary schools, are of religious patronage?

While Zappone’s focus may seem innocuous to some, the broader context suggests otherwise. For example, it is difficult to find anywhere that Zappone distinguishes between “homophobia” (which she described in the Seanad as “an irrational fear of and aversion to homosexuality manifesting itself in various forms“) and the simple expression of the traditional Christian belief on sex and marriage. Rather, evidence suggests that Zappone may consider these to be one and the same. Certainly this may explain why one of her admirers, MEP Maria Walsh, launched her campaign by expressing her desire to “ruffle the feathers of people…who hold traditional values“.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Zappone aims to dismantle homophobia of “religious leaders”

This concern is not without a legitimate foundation. In an address, for example, in May 2015 in a religious setting in Dublin, Senator Zappone called for the “dismantling of institutionalised homophobia, transphobia and biphobia“. Zappone further explicitly criticised “laws and systems – fashioned by religious and/or state leaders“.

Not only so, Zappone imbued her policy making with a religious zeal when she stated that the Promised Land of Old Testament Scripture that she sought was “a set of laws...”. This is a clear misinterpretation of the plain meaning of the Scripture text.

[The Promised Land of Old Testament Scripture] “that I and many other human rights activists seek is a set of laws…”.

Senator Katherine Zappone, Dublin, May 2015

Subsequently, in her closing line, Zappone urged those present to “re-define the meaning of normal…including the institution of civil marriage“. On the other hand, Zappone did not mention any preservation of freedom or dignity for those who objected to this redefinition of marriage.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Using laws to criminalise “religious intolerance”

Similarly, other legislators share Zappone’s desire to use laws to criminalise “homophobia” , including Maria Walsh. Walsh is a long-standing admirer of Zappone. For example, she stated in November 2015 regarding an award ceremony she attended with Zappone. “I’m going through bouts of imposter syndrome to be honest with you…how do you stand beside Senator Zappone?“. Notably, since election in May 2019, Walsh has spearheaded an EU resolution on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people“.

As with Zappone, one finds no proclivity with Maria Walsh to protect religious freedom of expression. Rather, Walsh’s resolution ranks “religious intolerance” as a motivator for hate crime alongside racism and xenophobia. In addition, Maria Walsh has repeatedly referred to a website with Christian objection to her LGBT activism in schools as “extremely homophobic“.

Criminalising dissent is a legislative move fraught with danger. Outlawing the democratic right of a people to freely express their conscience and convictions causes inhumanity to proliferate. Likewise, when a people lose their sense of right and wrong, and surrender it to the state, they become automatons.

In conclusion, Zappone’s legislative proposals threaten not just freedom but the very foundation of our democratic society.

Top of Page // Top of Section

Zappone’s legislative proposals threaten not just freedom, but the very foundation of our democratic society.

Who She Is