Dr. Simon Mills:

I agree entirely with the answers given by Mr. O'Connor in response to various questions. I wish to deal with only one issue, namely the assertion that by legislating for mental health in similar ways, other countries have somehow found themselves on a slippery slope. I would simply observe that I am aware of no country that has introduced a test along the lines that is being proposed in the 2013 Bill. I am aware of no country that has introduced a test that is as restrictive. The 1967 Californian legislation, which has been advanced as some sort of analogue a number of times, was a paragon example of bad legislative drafting. Whatever else about this legislation, it is precise in what it is aimed at. The California legislation was scatter-gun in its approach and involved a bowdlerised application of a legal test intended for other purposes. The text of the penal code was at odds with the text of the statute and the Act was struck down for vagueness. The English test is a far vaguer test than the one proposed in this jurisdiction. The assessment that an analogy can be drawn between the proposed Irish scheme and other schemes introduced in other jurisdictions is flawed. No one has been able to point to a statutory principle identical to that set out in the 2013 Bill that has been introduced in another jurisdiction and has, in fact, been abused in the way that is so often contended.