Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I think "as soon as practicable" is a moveable feast while "without unnecessary delay" is clearer and more actionable in cases of unreasonable delay. Unnecessary delay can have the effect of re-victimising a victim. The amendment provides greater clarity.

Amendments Nos. 21 and 22, from myself and Deputy O'Callaghan, respectively, differ slightly from each other. They deal with the need for victims to receive information which they can understand. Article 3(2) of the directive states "Member States shall ensure that communications with victims are given in simple and accessible language, orally or in writing." We have to take people's individual circumstances into account. In the case of somebody with limited reading ability, for example, written documentation will not be of any use. Conversely, a deaf person may like to receive information in writing rather than receiving it orally. My amendment provides for choice being given to the victim as to the format in which he or she receives information.

Deputy O'Callaghan's amendment No. 22 provides that the investigating authority should have regard to the level of understanding of the victim, but the decision is the authority's. I have put it the other way around. I am not sure the Garda should be the deciding party as it might not be able to adequately assess the comprehension of the victim. As a garda might simply think the victim probably is able to read it or whatever, the choice should be given to the victim.