Fine Gael's justice spokesman, Mr John Deasy, has, in a surprise move, voted with the Government and against his party on the controversial Immigration Bill, which passed all stages in the Dáil yesterday.
It is thought to be unprecedented for a frontbench spokesman to vote against his party, especially in his own area, but when the electronic vote was taken the Waterford TD gave the Government an extra vote and the legislation was comfortably passed by 74 votes to 54.
However it had not been expected that Fine Gael would vote against the legislation itself, because the party had initially supported the Bill, which has been criticised as going against UN and Geneva conventions on human rights.
Fine Gael voted with the Government when the radical Bill was first debated in the Dá at second stage some time ago. The party decided yesterday to vote against the Government because of the guillotine being put on the debate when there were more than 10 pages of amendments, the Fine Gael leader, Mr Enda Kenny said in a statement afterwards.
However, Fine Gael had already voted against the debate being cut short, earlier in the day during the Order of Business, when the day's agenda is set.
It was unclear at what point Mr Deasy was informed about the party's decision to vote against the legislation, but there was a tense silence on the Fine Gael benches when it became clear that the frontbench spokesman was voting with the Government, although he did exchange some remarks with TDs sitting beside him.
Mr Deasy later returned to the Dáil to represent his party in the final stages of the debate on the Intoxicating Liquor Bill, which also passed on stages.
In his statement later, Mr Kenny said that "deputy John Deasy voted with the Government in this vote. I will be speaking with Deputy Deasy later to clarify this matter." He added that it was not a matter of policy difference.
"Fine Gael had not objected to the principle of this piece of legislation but we had tabled a number of amendments to its provisions".
The Government tabled some 13 amendments, including two controversial ones, which it had flagged at committee stage. One includes the extension of finger-printing to include asylum seekers under 14-years of age, because of concerns about the trafficking of children. The second, in accordance with the Schengen Agreement, means that asylum-seekers under 18 who are refused leave to land in the State will not be detained by the authorities.
