Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I am gratified to hear that and I would have been surprised if the Senator had left. I know if he had left it would have involved an urgent matter. After a long absence I am delighted to be back in the House twice in the same day. I will take the concluding Stages of the next legislation also.

I will address Senator Norris's suggestion first. My officials have indicated that there has been overwhelming support across the House for the introduction of overarching whistleblowing legislation, which I have sought for a very long time. We introduced a Bill in the other House in the last term and another Bill was introduced by my colleague, Deputy Pat Rabbitte. This fits extremely well into the architecture of transparency that we are determined to set into normal practices across business, public administration and the way Ireland Inc. does business.

With regard to the very generous and helpful proposal from Senator Norris, I know the Senator is well versed in procedure and he cannot introduce his proposal as an amendment. I understand that all the points made have been supportive and some creative suggestions were made by Senators. I will carefully study all contributions before crafting the legislation I want to bring to the House at an early date.

Tonight provides me with the opportunity to reiterate my commitment in advance of legislation, which is urgently required. I do not particularly want to support a demand from the House to do something when I have already spent years negotiating for it to be done and had it enshrined in the programme for Government. I will update the House on the Government's decision on the matter and set out the main objectives and considerations that will guide my approach to this legislation.

The commitments in the programme for Government are quite specific and we will introduce whistleblower legislation. I make it crystal clear that we will do so in an overarching way. It is important also to make the point that the content of the original motion tabled today for debate highlights all of the reasons swift action is required in this area. I strongly commend Senator Mullen and the co-signatories of the motion for allowing me to make this contribution and correctly focusing this House on the important issue.

Ireland lags behind - certainly in the English speaking world - in the protection it affords to whistleblowers. I heard the distinguished Senator's comments regarding an leagan Gaeilge for "whistleblowers", and I will consider that in the context of the legislation to see if there can be a more delicate phrase that may better reflect what we intend.

The United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa have all enacted statutes prohibiting an employer from retaliating against employees for disclosing unlawful conduct. All of these statutes cover public and private sectors to some extent. Although no international agreement or convention necessarily mandates protection for good faith reporting at this time, there is a strong acknowledgement and recognition in a number of important international fora of the need for comprehensive legal safeguards to encourage the potential for whistleblowers to bring to light issues of significant public concern. When an individual brought information to my attention, I felt very vulnerable when I had to defend myself in the High Court and the Supreme Court.