Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I apologise for coming late to the meeting. I thank the witnesses for their outline submissions and opening statements, which were very helpful. The engagement is very much appreciated. At yesterday's hearing I made the more general point that many speakers have reiterated that a problem with this process is that we are looking at draft legislation to amend an Act that has not yet commenced. Those of us who were involved in the justice committee hearings on what became the 2015 Act have a sense of déjà vu, therefore, in debating these issues around legislating for capacity and trying to create an appropriate statutory framework yet again. It is unfortunate that this is the way it is being approached.

Yesterday, we also heard of difficulties and concerns about cumbersome language given the nature of the process. I wanted to make that point again. Could I ask for a couple of specific clarifications? I apologise if they have been addressed in previous contributions. In the contribution from the Centre for Disability Law and Policy in NUIG, Dr. Flynn and Ms de Bhailís made the point about the gap in terms of the language around the eighth amendment.

I invite them to expand on that if they have not done so already. I have received some concerns about that, and I think other Members have as well, from other individuals and groups.

I refer to moving to a rights-based approach, which the IHREC and others have commented on. When we are talking about a rights-based approach there is a difficulty with the interface between the 2015 Act and the Mental Health Acts. I know we have already addressed the issue of how this will extend to persons in involuntary detention but I want to expand it. Perhaps one of the witnesses would like to come in again on that. Ms Flynn and Mr. Flaherty from the Mental Health Commission made a point on the DSS about the stand-alone legislation that is being developed by the Department of Health on protection of liberty safeguards for institutional settings. Can the witnesses say any more on that or give us an update? How will that complement or work together with this framework once it is completed?