Mr. Séamus Clarke:

I will address that question first. Deputy Durkan raises a good point concerning the speed that an issue can be dealt with. We welcome in that regard head 21 of the proposed Bill, that allows for interim relief to be sought in the courts in more circumstances than have traditionally applied, which were essentially cases where people were potentially going to be or had been dismissed. In such instances, one can now go before the courts for interim relief if one is to be penalised in any way and not just by dismissal. An opportunity, therefore, is being provided to get into the Circuit Court and to get interim relief to prevent penalisation taking place. That can be done relatively rapidly. The Circuit Court will have to be resourced properly, because if this type of litigation becomes popular, then the strain on the Circuit Court will continue to manifest. One case involving a protective disclosure being dealt with will mean that another case is not being dealt with. The provision of interim relief in a more expansive way, therefore, will assist people to get before the courts who need to do so rapidly.

In addition, new procedures will now apply. People must have the receipt of protected disclosures acknowledged within seven days. There is also a requirement for such disclosures to be followed up diligently. Feedback must also be provided to the reporting person of the actions taken or envisaged within three months. This depends on the size of the organisation, though, and that is what is mandated as a potential to bring out from the directives. For example, the obligation is placed on organisations with 50 or more employees to establish formal channels and provide for employees to make protected disclosures, with a derogation until 17 December 2023. It is for the Members of the legislature to consider whether they want to set that number at 50 employees or to reduce it to include smaller organisations. There has been a history of wrongdoing in, for example, charities, where the number of employees in such an organisation would be much smaller. That is a qualitative decision to be made by the legislature.

We agree wholeheartedly, though, with Deputy Durkan's comments regarding speed being of the essence. There are shoots in that regard in these heads of the proposed Bill in the form of the potential interim relief measure and the speed at which follow-up must take place once someone makes a protected disclosure. It is potentially important, though, to consider whether there might be a need to reduce the number of employees in respect of those organisations covered by the provisions of this proposed Bill to allow for the maximum speed of response to people making protected disclosures.