Mr. Mark Toland:

We welcome the new powers because there are gaps in our ability to do unannounced visits, to publish our own reports and to monitor responses to our reports subsequently. Therefore, we welcome the enhancement of those powers. It will be part of the responsibility of the proposed PCSA. We feel, however, that this aspect should be legislated for. The heads of this proposed Bill refer to a memorandum of understanding, MOU. We see that as something that would then have to be negotiated and agreed, as per the proposed legislation. What would happen, though, if no agreement could be reached in that regard?

We are happy with the powers it is proposed to provide, but we feel this situation should be more formalised. Those are the points we were trying to make. I refer to the legislation being strengthened, rather than just having an MOU governing this aspect. I refer in particular to trying to agree that MOU. We felt there was a gap in that regard. I think the legislation relevant to us refers to a requirement to provide documents but not information. Head 177 of this proposed Bill is clearer about what will be provided to the new ombudsman's office and we feel that provision should be replicated for the proposed PCSA and the inspection function. It is made explicit in that context that documents and information must be provided. I hope that clarifies this issue for the Deputy.