Robbie Gallagher (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chair and members for affording me the opportunity to say a few words. The justice committee, of which I am a member, is sitting next door so I had to pop out there and I will have to go back afterwards and get the response from our guests. I compliment them and the committee on this engagement. It certainly shows the importance of pre-legislative scrutiny so we get an opportunity to hear first hand from the people at the coalface about how proposed legislation is going to affect the day-to-day running of whatever organisation it relates to at a given time.

I will talk in general terms before I pose a few questions. The road we are going down is a very dangerous one. It is a very dangerous precedent to be setting. As was said earlier, if it is the Defence Forces today, will it be the Garda tomorrow, or another aspect of the public service? The old adage "If it's not broken don't fix it" springs to mind here. Going back through the past 34 or 35 years, both RACO and PDFORRA have provided excellent representation to their members. I have always listened to them and come away with the belief the representatives were very sensible, intelligent individuals who put forward very practical solutions. They were not just about raising problems from their membership but also coming forward with proposals that would provide solutions to those problems. I am a bit aghast at this proposed legislation in front of us. I just do not know where it is coming from or what the motivation behind it is. I am at a loss, to be honest, that someone would draw up and place before us legislation that proposes to be nothing more than a gagging order, going forward, for both representative bodies and the membership they represent. It is a very backward step.

I will move on to a few questions. I welcome Mr. Jacob, who has had the longest journey of all to attend this afternoon. I thank him for being here. His organisation stretches over 23 EU countries, I think he said. From his perspective and experience, is this the most far-reaching legislation he has come across? Does this overstretch or overreach more than any other EU country he has jurisdiction over?

To the other three guests, some of them have said that in discussions with the Department, it is more or less putting them at their ease by telling them to relax, that there is nothing to see here and that it is not its intention to prohibit anybody from having a voice. Despite this the Department is moving ahead to put this into primary legislation. What do our guests think is the motivation behind that? What has gone wrong that the Department has come up with a proposal such as this, because, as I said it, seems very far-reaching? What do they think is behind how both bodies are going to be excluded from sitting on this new review group? When they asked the Department why it is going here, what response did they get back? What is the Department's motivation or what is it saying in response to that?

I sincerely hope this is not the end of the road in this regard. I hope common sense prevails at the end of the day in order that the final legislation that comes out is suitable. The general scheme is fine apart from, as was stated, heads Nos. 25, 26 and 28, but I hope common sense prevails and everyone is satisfied going forward.