Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

On section 57, yesterday we brought in amendment No. 5. If regulations are going to be made under section 57, the Minister is going to have to lay them before the Oireachtas for prospective approval. The Minister did not mention his own amendment, amendment No. 87. Will he tell us why he is removing judicial independence as one of the important objectives of general public interest? Is it because the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has asked him to do so? Perhaps not. I would be interested to hear the logic behind that provision.

I am interested in amendment No. 92, proposed by Deputies Clare Daly and Mick Wallace. Subsection (7) of section 57 sets out important objectives of general public interest referred to in subsection (6). It is better to have it slightly vague so that paragraphs (a) to (n) are not exclusive and that one can go beyond them. The way this could be challenged in court, we could have a large corporation challenging regulations that have been made by the Minister and approved by the Oireachtas. If it is the case that subsection (7) states that the important objectives can only include (a) to (n), that is a good opportunity for them to say the regulations are not valid because they do not come within that list. On balance, we are better off not limiting the scenarios pursuant to which general public interest can be identified. It is very broad. If we limit it, there may be a situation that we have not envisaged whereby regulations in respect of public interest are introduced.

A lot of the time here, we are thinking of situations that will arise where a villainous Minister is issuing regulations supported by an oppressive Government and the rest of us are trying to oppose them. The reality is that it will be large corporations trying to challenge regulations that have been brought in by the State.

I will be supporting amendment No. 95. Amendment No. 96 is effectively provided for because of amendment No. 5. I do not think it is necessary for that reason. Amendment No. 97 is proposed by Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire. I would make the same point again. It is legislation that is being made by way of regulation although it is referred to as secondary legislation. We should do it. I understand Deputy Ó Laoghaire's point. We are not farming it out to the Data Protection Commissioner. We should make our decision based on what we view as being in the public interest. The elected Members of the Oireachtas are much more in tune with what is or is not in the public interest than any statutory body established by us.