Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is seeking to assume powers of massive foresight which the committee does not have. Effectively, we will be neutered and precluded. Like Deputy Donnelly, I cannot understand how this will work in practice because all the chief executive officer or the director general will have to do, if asked to come before the committee, is respond to the effect that the matter could be the subject of a court case. He or she would be right in saying so, as anything could be the subject of a court case. This will give the person in charge a veto.

I have withdrawn my amendment on the basis that I will retable it, but in the intervening time it would be helpful to have a note on this issue. We say the Minister of State is giving the director general a veto in deciding if he or she should ever come before the committee, but she is saying she is not doing so. The reasons this provision does, effectively, amount to a veto were very well outlined, but the Minister of State insists that she is not giving one. Perhaps she might ask the Minister to outline for us, in some detail, why he believes this will not operate in such a way. The Minister of State says she will not accept amendments. While I will do my very best to accept her explanation, she should not be surprised if I do not accept it. I ask for a note to be provided well in advance of Report Stage with an explanation of how this provision will not act as a veto. To my mind, it clearly will.