Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Head 8 is at the core of the Zalewski judgment in relation to oral hearings and the requirement for quasi-judicial bodies to have hearings in public. We are not going that far, basically stating there is an option to have the hearings in public. I presume that will satisfy the delegates. The Attorney General is obviously satisfied more than the delegates or me regarding the judgment. I have not studied it, so I have no opinion on it either way. My opinion would be worthless anyway. Maybe the next speaker will pass judgment on that.

How will the decision be made? I agree with the comment that people making complaints, when putting pen to paper or lifting the phone, do not want to think they will be cross-examined at an oral hearing by a legal team from one of the main banks, considering all the weight that throws against them. That would freak them out and frighten them, and maybe they would not make the complaints. That is an issue. This continues to allow for what we expect, namely the holding of the vast majority of cases in private, but with the possibility of holding oral hearings in public. Was that not always the case? It would be decided upon after consultation with both parties. Can the delegates talk to me about how their office will determine whether an oral hearing should be in public or private? If a bank states mediation has not worked in a certain case and it wants an oral hearing in public, although the other side does not want that, what criteria will the FSPO use to make a judgment under head 8 of the legislation?