Mr. Kevin Condon:

There are a number of points on the table but I will pick two or three of them. Mr. Herrick has mentioned the international conventions, which are very important. As far possible, we have attempted to have regard to international conventions and best practice. The two that loom the largest are the Group of States against Corruption, GRECO, recommendations and the European Commission's view of our legislation. It is important to say this scheme and the new Bill probably move much closer to what GRECO and the European Commission would like to see in one very important area, which is the composition of the commission itself. That is important.

Mr. Herrick made a point about the election of judges. I am not 100% sure about how that would be developed except that some of the nuts and bolts of the provisions are not absolutely finalised. Looking at two Judicial Council nominees, there is a process within the council on how those members would be put forward. That may involve some element of what Mr. Herrick is referring to.

Deputy Carroll MacNeill asked who will conduct interviews. These are significant questions in how the eventual Bill will pan out. There is provision for criteria and statements of qualification and procedures. Some of the elements that those statements and approaches must have regard to include independence of the Judiciary. There are some benchmarks around the concept of judicial independence where regard would be had when those statements on procedures and skills are produced. I guess it will be members of the judicial commission who will conduct those interviews. It seems a logical conclusion from the provisions as they have been developed to date. We may have to wait to see what the commission produces. It is required that after 12 months it should produce detailed documentation as to how the procedures are to be managed.