Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As we have a quorum, we will begin in public session. All mobile phones should be switched off as they cause interference with the recording equipment, even when in silent mode. The business of this morning's meeting of the Select Committee on Justice and Equality is to address Committee Stage of the Coroners Bill 2015. However, under Article 17.2 of the Constitution, "Dáil Éireann shall not pass any vote or resolution and no law shall be enacted, for the appropriation of revenue or other public moneys unless the purpose of the appropriation shall have been recommended to Dáil Éireann by a message from the Government signed by the Taoiseach." Furthermore, Standing Order No. 179 (2) of the Houses of the Oireachtas provides that, "The Committee Stage of a Bill which involves the appropriation of revenue or other public moneys, including incidental expenses, shall not be taken unless the purpose of the appropriation has been recommended to the Dáil by a Message from the Government. The text of any Message shall be printed on the Order Paper."

As the Coroners Bill 2015 will involve, we are advised, a charge on the Exchequer and no message, as mentioned, has been printed on the Order Paper, it is not possible to proceed with Committee Stage of the Bill at this time. Copies of correspondence received yesterday from the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality were circulated to members of the committee, which outlined the Government's position in this regard. I will offer members the opportunity to comment at this point in time. I will first afford Deputy Clare Daly the opportunity to brief the select committee on any engagements or developments and her current thinking on the matter now before us. Before that however, I wish to inform the committee that I took the initiative last week, following our meeting of last Wednesday, to engage directly with the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality to underscore the importance and seriousness with which the committee views not just the Coroners Bill but the full tranche of Private Members' Bills that present to this committee. It is a very serious matter which I endeavoured to convey to her. I believe, in fairness, that she accepted that and she undertook to have the matter addressed in the intervening period. As we know from the responses of An Taoiseach yesterday to the leader of the Fianna Fáil party, Deputy Micheál Martin, this matter was addressed at Cabinet yesterday. However, regarding the Bill before us this morning, it is important to note that this was first flagged as far back as seven months ago, in late November 2016 and here we are now, on 10 May. As Chairman, I wish to record that I find this situation wholly and absolutely unacceptable for Members of the Houses, of whatever political persuasion or outlook, who have put in the time and effort to prepare, properly explore and research what they view to be necessary legislative change. It is a very serious matter indeed that having passed Second Stage successfully in the Dáil, legislation is now held up in the ether. As a Member of Dáil Éireann and the Chairman of this committee, I wish to record the fact that I find this situation intolerable.

I now invite Deputy Daly to open up the discussion, to advise us on where she believes matters are and how she wishes to proceed with her Bill.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with the Chairman's comments. It is beyond shocking the way this committee has been treated in terms of dealing with this issue. I remind members that when we finished our pre-legislative discussions, the committee unanimously agreed that we should go forward. We also agreed that formal Committee Stage would be scheduled for today, as per the minutes, which would give the Department six months to bring forward detailed and comprehensive Committee Stage amendments. In the intervening time, we have mentioned the Bill on a number of occasions. When the Department officials were before the committee over six months ago, they made a lot of the points that were repeated in the Minister's letter yesterday and I had a feeling about it even then, to be honest. My office spent time preparing 60 amendments to fulfil our side of the bargain when we could have been doing other things. The Bills office, the Ceann Comhairle's office, the committee clerk's office, and the Dáil printers have all been tied up, right up to the last minute. Not only that, we must consider the women and midwives in the Elephant Collective and the husbands of women who have died, who had arranged to come in here this morning. We only got an official copy of the letter telling us that Committee Stage was not going ahead at 5.59 p.m. yesterday. It is unbelievable, particularly when the Ceann Comhairle had written about the money message issue, with a deadline of 12 April.

There are two issues here. One is the money message itself and the impact that will have on all Bills going forward. It is completely wrong but that is a bigger picture issue for everyone and it must be addressed. We must take steps to address that but the other issue is the Coroners Bill itself and what happens to it. The Minister telephoned me at about 4 p.m. yesterday, all apologies and the rest. She said that the Government wants to move ahead with specific provisions in the Bill as part of its legislation and wants to work with me on that. There was no point in me throwing the head with her. I said that was fair enough but I asked her how she could guarantee that this would be brought in by the summer, which is what she was saying. I noted afterwards that the letter said that it would be included in legislation to be "published" before the summer.

According to the discussion I had with her on the phone, however, it is to finish Report Stage by the summer. If the amendments I tabled today were passed today, it would be in by the summer and these people would get a mandatory inquest in cases of maternal deaths, which is what we say everybody wants. I do not know where we are with that because there is a contradiction between the written word and what the Minister said on the phone. She has indicated that, as did her officials last week, but it is a bit shallow of the Department. I do not mean the Minister is shallow personally, but everything the Department says in the letter, it said seven months ago in November. It said it was going to set up this elite team which would look at the coronial service.

The legislation dealing with the Coroner Service is now 55 years old. For 17 years, the Department has been looking at this issue but at one minute to 6 p.m., we get a letter asking us for a bit more time. It is beyond belief. I want my provisions brought in by the summer but I do not know how we can do it. The Minister has indicated that she will work with us but the timeline is not there for it to happen. Not only, by the way, have a lot of people made arrangements to come up, but the group of bereaved husbands, midwives and campaigners has got 20 local authorities to sign up to support this maternity provision which is urgently required. I am gutted but it is not unexpected. I do not know what to do. What can we do? I have to work with the Minister to try to get it in and I want to hold her to getting it done before the summer, but I do not know how that is going to come off.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I bring in Deputy O'Callaghan, Deputy Daly has referred to the fact local authorities nationally have expressed support for certain positions and called for the progression of the Coroners Bill. Just this week, we have received a communication from Galway City Council. I apprise the committee of its content. It states a wish to bring to our attention the fact Galway City Council at its meeting on 6 March 2017 resolved the following motion: "That Galway City Council request the Government to progress the Coroner's Bill as a matter of urgency that the Coroner's Bill will provide for an automatic inquest into every maternal death in this state." That is the critical focus in terms of what it is arguing for and, indeed, what Deputy Clare Daly has focused on in the preparation and presentation of her Bill. The letter from the council is signed by the meetings administrator, Mr. Foley. This letter is simply representative of a number of expressions of support from local authorities across the country. It confirms what Deputy Daly has said.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I share the views the Chairman has expressed and I appreciate the frustration Deputy Daly has expressed. I appreciate it because I went through a similar form of frustration on 30 November last. I had prepared a Bill and a number of members had put down proposed amendments to it. On Committee Stage, we were told there was no money message. In fairness, on this occasion the Department at least paid Deputy Daly the courtesy of writing her a letter setting out in detail its explanation. What has happened here, however, is worse than what happened to my Bill because my Bill was on a change in the system of judicial appointments, which is not an issue that will impinge on the personal lives of very many individuals. Here, however, we are dealing with maternal deaths, which is a much more sensitive issue. As Deputy Daly said, many people are directly affected. I went back and had a look at the speech Deputy Sean Fleming made in the Dáil on 11 December 2015. He expressed concisely and clearly Fianna Fáil's view of the urgency of the Bill and I endorse what he said.

In the case of my Bill, it was just a political stroke in circumstances where the Government did not want my Bill to go through. What is more frustrating about this is that we went through the process of pre-legislative scrutiny six months ago. In a way, the officials were made fools of too in being brought here and ordered to engage with us. Certainly, I suspected strongly that we would not get a money message. The issue of a money message is a very interesting constitutional one although I am not saying we should condemn it. If one were putting forward a Bill from outside Government which involved enormous expenditure, the need for a money message would be understandable. However, there is no financial consequence here in respect of the maternal deaths issue. There was very little financial consequence in the case of my Bill either.

Deputy Daly asked what we should do. On behalf of the Oireachtas, we must assert some influence. We must assert our authority. The Minister has said that she will include in the courts and civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill the details on maternal deaths. We have to take a stance in respect of the Government and its legislation. Last week, I suggested we should not co-operate with Government legislation and, in fairness to them, Deputies Farrell and Brophy said correctly that it would be an excessive step. It probably was excessive. However, I propose that we pick one Bill we know the Government is anxious to get on the Statute Book and refuse to deal with it in the select committee until such time as the provisions on maternal deaths in the courts and civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill come before us with a money message.

The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, was on the radio last Friday saying one of his great achievements in office was the judicial appointments Bill which has not even been published, let alone enacted. I propose that the committee refuses to commence Committee Stage of that Bill until such time as the provisions on maternal deaths in the courts and civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill come before us with a money message. When that happens, we will deal with their other Bill. That is just a proposal I make.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We note what Deputy O'Callaghan has said.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Obviously, there is a great deal in Deputy Daly's Bill which I have said is excellent and which should be progressed. I recognise, however, the letter from the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality indicating that it requires a money message and that she is willing to work with the committee to ensure that key provisions within the Bill are incorporated and passed in a timely way. I welcome her letter and that willingness to work with us.

To respond to Deputy O'Callaghan's comments, to have a problem with legislation and oppose it because it is wrong is a completely justifiable process and part of our parliamentary democracy. While his proposal last week was far more wide-ranging, I note again that it is really regrettable to go down the road of targeting any Bill not because of its merits or otherwise but in order to engage in an act of sabotage for reasons of being vindictive on foot of something elsewhere in the legislative process. It does not serve democracy or the legislative process well and it does not serve our reputation as a justice committee. I am quite prepared to lose votes over something I believe in. I am quite prepared to support something even if it is not necessarily the stated view of my party or Government. I am quite prepared to work with my colleagues here, but I would never like to see someone, including me, thwarting legislation deliberately because I had not got my way on something else. That is really a regrettable way to treat any Bill.

While recognising the frustration Deputy O'Callaghan and his colleagues feel about this Bill and its progress, I suggest we attempt to engage and work with the Minister to identify what aspects of the legislation can be passed speedily. We should work on every Bill in that framework and refrain from starting off down the proposed road. Nobody gains from going down this road.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have seen a number of examples of this from the Government. It is a display of contempt for the committee process and our very parliamentary democracy. This is a minority Government of Independents and Fine Gael. We heard all the rhetoric at the start that it is a coalition between the Dáil and Government.

There has to be a symbiotic process that works both ways for that. We meet very regularly as a committee to facilitate legislation as we do. For legislation that everyone across the House supports and wants to progress, when we have given seven months' notice for it and the Department of Justice and Equality does not engage with the work programme as it should, then we have to exercise our role within the context of our parliamentary democracy. That means rebalancing the concentration of executive power that is there currently with our own legislative capacity. It means that when there are pieces of legislation that are extremely important, we should balance those against other legislation that is equally important. There is no reason why the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill should trump a very important piece of legislation from Deputy Clare Daly. That could be the expressed view of this committee. If we prioritise one piece of legislation, it should get the due diligence of the Department.

It also shows that the Department of Justice and Equality cannot handle the spread of its existing brief. We see this across a number of pieces of legislation, where we see delay or ignorance about particular pieces of information. Where it came to policing, it could not respond to different matters on which we questioned it. This raises serious questions about how the Department as it is currently structured can handle the legislative process. If it cannot, then it needs to say so and allow for it to be restructured. As legislators, we cannot be left here waiting for months to try to progress a Bill and then hear that the Department has not had time to do it. We have given it plenty of time and we have to exercise our role which means prioritising, as Deputy Jim O'Callaghan has said, one piece of legislation, so that we have the kind of rebalancing the Government wanted at the start of its formation. It cannot have it both ways. It can have it in a majoritarian sense, but it is not in a majority and needs to respect the numbers it has and work with everyone to progress all legislation that it wants. It cannot have it both ways and that needs to be communicated to the Government.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Chambers. Did Deputy Daly want to come back in?

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to address some of those matters. The Tánaiste's letter yesterday made the point that the Bill itself was, in essence, a Government Bill from 2007 on to which we added other aspects to deal with maternal deaths and all the rest of it. If the Department had turned around since November and said that changes had happened to measures and that it wanted to deal with that - which is kind of what it was saying - and that it had set up a working group, that the model might be different, and that it would liaise with us, and that it intended for something to happen, we could have lived with that and worked with it. That is precisely why we gave it all the time we did to get us to Committee Stage. What galls me is that, against my 60 amendments to the Bill there is not a single amendment from the Department of Justice and Equality. The Tánaiste, when I raised it yesterday, said that the Department could not really do anything until it knew whether there was a money message or not. That is not the case, because it was supposed to be working on this in any event. That is what it told us.

I genuinely believe, though it is not vindictive, that there has been a breach of trust here with this committee and the Department because of this. If our views are going to be respected, then we have to do something. I agree with that. I will use whatever leverage is possible to ensure that these provisions get enacted before the summer. I do not see how that miracle is going to be pulled off. I will talk to the Tánaiste about that in detail. I do not see anything wrong with focusing the attention. We are not saying that we are not going to co-operate with any legislation, but that this one has to prioritised. We will deal with the others once this one is dealt with. We would then make it in the Department's interests to deal with this one as quickly as possible. I think we need to do that because of the content of the issue.

I think about the people who had organised child-minding, days off work, volunteers, midwives and bereaved fathers who have made this project their goal. This Bill went through Second Stage in 2015. They have been waiting for that ever since, going around the country, advocating support and so on. The Department needs to deliver on this now, so what better way than to tell it that it can work on this Bill now because that is what we are prioritising?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a question for Deputy Daly before I call Deputy O'Callaghan again. On maternal death inquests, that they be compulsory and happen as a matter of course, is it possible that could perhaps be extrapolated from the current draft Bill as presented and incorporated in other legislation in the offing?

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not have the expertise to say that. After the pre-legislative process, we went through it in depth and we tried to take that on board. Some of the amendments I have would reflect that and define what is meant by "maternal death". They say that somebody who was pregnant and died of cancer would be excluded. That tightens the definition of a maternal death and so on. Could that fit in on something else? I do not know. I do not even know the Bill the Tánaiste is talking about. I do not think there has been a heads of a Bill published on that, so there is no way that is going to be done by the summer. The Tánaiste said something about the Courts Bill, but I do not know if she meant a different Courts Bill. This was in a phone call late yesterday afternoon. It would seem to be a miracle that it could be included, even though she said it would be. I do not know.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to briefly address Deputy Colm Brophy's point. I agree that the committee should work with the Tánaiste on the proposal to have a system for investigation of maternal deaths. The reason I pick the forthcoming Judicial Appointments Commission Bill is because there are obviously certain things that get done quickly as there is pressure in Cabinet to act. There is attention on that Bill, because the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, seems to be able to exert attention and effort on the Tánaiste such that it is forthcoming. I believe that if the Government is now aware that the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill will not be dealt with at committee until the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill is dealt with on committee, that it will crack the whip in respect of the maternal deaths part of the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. It will get it done quicker and exert some pressure.

Perhaps we as a committee do not need a formal decision, but we can make decisions ourselves as to what Bills we take and when we take them. Usually what happens is that we have Second Stage one week, and then when it is a Government Bill it is presented to the committee the following week, we facilitate it, we get it through, we do our duty, and we send it back to have Report and Final Stages completed. What is going to happen here, and I have seen it before even though I have only been here for a little over a year, is that this Bill will not be published before summer because there is no pressure on it, but if the Minister, Shane Ross, is thinking that he cannot get his own Judicial Appointments Commission Bill through - his great achievement - he will ensure that there is pressure for it to be done, and it will be done.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to make a couple of observations. It is not just that I am sympathetic, I am fully appreciative of the points that Deputy Brophy has made. We are scheduled to take the Criminal Justice (Victims of Crime) Bill next week. I appreciate Deputy O'Callaghan recrafting his position as of last week, that we would target that Bill. There is the Disability (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill that we are all anxious to see enacted to provide for ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD, and there is also consensus that we target it. This committee is absolutely intent on facilitating the passage of all of these.

I understand and appreciate the point made about demonstrating the degree of our vexation, but I get the sense that we are making a mistake if we look at ourselves in isolation as the Select Committee on Justice and Equality. I am thinking of the Taoiseach's reply on the floor of the Dáil yesterday. Some 140 Private Members' Bills are now queued up. My understanding is that 13 - that is almost 10% - of those are relevant to this committee. There are a number of other committees, and this situation is presenting in them. We need to exercise much greater leverage than even what has been contemplated here about targeting an individual Bill.

I suggest that the committee would agree the following.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, in his last contribution, said that we would not have to make the decision today vis-à-viswhat he proposed regarding the judicial appointments Bill. A special meeting of the working group of committee chairs should be convened. As Chairman of this committee, I would contact Deputy Jim Daly on the committee's behalf to convene a special meeting of the working group of committee chairs. This should not involve the justice committee on its own as this issue is systemic within these institutions. It is not particular to ourselves and it is happening across the board. The Taoiseach's reply yesterday indicated that perhaps a sum of money should be set aside in order to allow for a certain number of Private Members' Bills to get through the process. A figure of €100 million was cited, if I remember correctly, as I was in the Chamber. I understand a figure of €12 million was referenced by the Taoiseach with respect to Deputy Daly's Bill in his reply. He was quite definitely across the detail of this Bill.

I add this in a slightly jocund way and I am sure Deputy Daly will check the blacks. I note Deputy Martin referenced our Coroners Bill and, having seen that Deputy Daly was not in the Chamber, I said he was a lucky man.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will check that record.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought the Deputy might. We need to build greater weight around our position as the issue is not us. I do not doubt the sincerity of the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality in terms of isolating the maternal deaths issue and wanting to accommodate it. I share Deputy Daly's scepticism as to whether that is achievable within the timeframe. I would love if it were possible and before the summer recess it is something we should emphasise and encourage as a target. That must be done. My sense is we need a special meeting of the working group of committee chairs. I have not been able to establish if the four Private Members' Bills that the Ceann Comhairle referred for reply on 12 April, as Deputy Daly already alluded to, had a reply issued. I have no copy of any reply and to the best of my knowledge, there has been no reply.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been none.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Those are particular lines. Rather than confining our address of this issue in committee, as we are this morning or at any time, we must go beyond ourselves and reach out to other committee chairmen through the working group. We should work directly with the Ceann Comhairle in order to explore what further real and substantive pressure can be applied across the board because this is not particular to us or the Bill we are to address this morning. I wonder if the members would agree that those particular lines of exploration would be taken on board first and we would defer consideration of any other action until we have some report back on those. If the committee agrees, I would waste no time in seeking that both opportunities would be met in the coming days, if possible.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Chairman makes a very solid proposal and there are obvious and tangible benefits to bringing the chairmen of the committees together to enable a broader discussion to take place. I was present yesterday when the Taoiseach made his remarks on the fundamental issue of cost implications across all Private Members' legislation coming through in terms of departmental budgets in any given year and how it would be addressed. I heard him make the same statements with figures mentioned by the Chairman. Something needs to be done on this and it is probably is a greater issue than just our own committee. The Chairman has outlined a very concrete set of steps and I fully support him in the process he outlined.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Chairman has outlined concrete steps and he should pursue them. However, much of politics is about understanding where power resides. Currently, much power resides in the Cabinet and we can sometimes exercise a bit of power. We should not be afraid to exercise our power. If we want to get the issue of maternal deaths put on the Statute book in this country as promptly as possible, we must tell the Government to get on with it, and if it does not do so, we will interfere with it. I do not know if a decision is formally required on my proposal because we set our own agenda. As a committee, we should not list for hearing a piece of legislation that is very sensitive from the Government's perspective until such time as it gets this piece of legislation before this committee. The legislation prepared by Deputy Daly is ready. The Government must put it into this other form of legislation and bring it back to us. If no pressure is put on the Government, that will not happen.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

An important political aspect to this is we will probably have a new Minister for Justice and Equality within the next few weeks, judging by all the speculation we have seen. When the current Minister was appointed, the Gambling Control Bill went off the table as a priority. When Ministers change, so do their priorities. We have taken the word of the Tánaiste and Minister that this is a matter of priority for her, we are not sure who the new Minister will be and what programme or priorities that Minister will have. I would be very sceptical about this coming before the Dáil or being published properly or progressed in advance of the summer recess. That is why we must exercise some level of authority now. The judicial appointments Bill would allow that rebalancing to occur without compromising any other piece of important legislation. That must happen and it must be felt at the heart of Cabinet so it cannot dictate terms to the Oireachtas or committees within that Oireachtas. When we prioritise something and give seven months notice, it is not good enough for a phone call or a letter to arrive the afternoon before our meeting. People have waited too long for this.

Colm Brophy (Dublin South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will respond to Deputy O'Callaghan's comments in particular. It is regrettable, whatever about the toing and froing in the Dáil Chamber, that with regard to Committee Stage one could be almost dismissive of the type of commitments made by the Tánaiste in the letter to this committee. She clearly states she wants to bring forward the appropriate visions and she wants to work with the committee to ensure that happens. The Tánaiste is Minister for Justice and Equality and she is doing an excellent job in both roles. She has written to us and put it on the record of our committee. When we sit as a committee we must acknowledge and respect what somebody states to a committee. It is her intention to bring this forward. The Chairman has outlined a very concrete set of proposals and a clear roadmap. Not only does it try to address the issue of our own piece of legislation before this committee but it also tries to use it in trying to facilitate a broader discussion on dealing with the greater issue of all the Bills that are stalled. It would be very regrettable if we did not go with the Chairman's proposal as it will deliver far more both for our committee and the legislative process.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The manner in which the Government is dealing with this is wrong and it will continue to treat us as it pleases unless we are prepared to take a stand. Deputy O'Callaghan's proposal is rational and it is not crazy or off the wall. We will force the Government to come to the mark if we initiate his proposal. If we do not, the Government will continue to do as it pleases with us.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like Deputy Daly to give the closing commentary.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am finished.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will make a brief comment before inviting Deputy Daly to speak. We do not have to decide now on what Deputy O'Callaghan has said, because the Bill to which he referred is not presenting now and we do not have to schedule it at this point. Without making a decision and creating division, we can communicate that this was a very strongly expressed view. It will have the same net effect as making the decision formally. It is not helpful to make the decision.

Jack Chambers (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is helpful for the Bill. What is the difference between the expressed view and the other view?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Deputy Chambers to allow the Chair to finish. My view is that we can have the same impact by referring to the strength of opinion expressed this morning and balancing it with the steps I have outlined, which I think we should pursue as far as possible. One is complementary to the other and it would show that we are taking every other course while demonstrating that there is a view which is very strongly held among members this morning. As a Chairman - and Deputy Chambers will be in this position some day - it is critically important to maintain the cohesion, effectiveness and co-operation of this committee. That formula allows us to do that today. I would like the opportunity to exhaust all the other avenues and they will add punch to our message that we are not seen in isolation but are part of the greater entity, across all committee positions. I undertake to personally communicate the strength of views of members this morning and to provide a proper reflection of them directly to the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality. I know that she will be open to the opportunity of engagement and I will hold nothing back.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not a case of not believing the Minister or believing that she does not have genuine intent. The problem is that, one and a half years ago, the Minister did not oppose the Bill but made a statement saying she would like the provisions to be enacted. Now they will not be enacted. There will be a delay to their enactment unless we get concrete assurances that this will be dealt with by departmental officials, who have been very disrespectful to this Bill and this committee. We need to apply whatever leverage we can to address it because it is beyond urgent for the families involved. Every new inquest we hear of emphasises that this needs to be in place to improve maternity services. I do not think the two options are mutually exclusive. It was suggested that we go to committee chairs and I raised it at the Business Committee. It has been a topic of discussion every weekend and there is a much bigger picture, apart from this Bill. We can take it that the strategy is agreed.

We have to put it up to the Department, whether by taking a vote on it now or postponing the vote until next week, pending discussion with the Department and a timetable for this thing to be enacted by the summer. To be honest, I cannot seen it happening now. In order to focus attention we need to keep the proposition there. I am in favour of reaching a decision, whether today or next week.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Chairman will communicate that we will reach a decision next week.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will seek a special meeting of the working group of committee chairs and engage directly with the Ceann Comhairle. I will speak directly with the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality on behalf of the committee to communicate the extent of people's frustration with the situation.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Good.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will certainly make myself available to meet the Department to see how we can advance this, box it off in the coming days and get a strategy but if that is not forthcoming we have to act.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have to exert some power.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We do.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask members for agreement on the steps we can take, which I have outlined in summary.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can we revert to this specific proposal next week when we hear back from the Chairman?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We can. The steps the Deputy wishes to take might best be taken when the Bill on judicial appointments presents. I do not know when it is likely to present but the Deputy has signalled a course of action and this suggests it would have the same impact. I leave it to members to consider. In the intervening period, I remind members that we have the Criminal Justice (Victims of Crime) Bill 2016, with the Minister or a designated Minister of State in attendance, here next Wednesday.

Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As long as we are returning to this decision next week, and pending the Department's comments, we are agreed that we are not shelving the proposition. It is very much alive and can be voted on next week.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, if members feel that is the most appropriate time to do it. Do we know if the Minister is coming in herself?

Clerk to the Committee:

It has not been confirmed.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is where we are at. I will endeavour to take the other steps in the intervening period. Deputy Daly may have the opportunity over the same period to meet and engage with the Minister on what might be possible so that we have a better understanding of what she is suggesting. A telephone call never suffices in these cases. After the engagement there may be greater clarity and the situation might not be as unachievable as we fear. Other matters need to be addressed but we cannot go into them during today's select committee meeting. They include correspondence but we need to schedule a private meeting of the joint committee to progress that, the other report and other things. Would members be willing to consider a meeting of the joint committee in private session? It will be businesslike and designed to enable us to get through our business quickly. A select committee meeting is scheduled for next Wednesday, 17 May and there is also one the following week, on 24 May, for Deputy O'Callaghan's Parole Bill 2016-----

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

For which we have a money message.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----for which we have a money message. We cannot allow the build-up of other work to take place. We cannot do this in select committee and I need to schedule a meeting of the joint committee. Would members be willing to have a short meeting of the joint committee at 2.30 p.m. tomorrow week, Thursday, 18 May?

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Fianna Fáil has a Front Bench meeting at 3 p.m. on that afternoon and it is mandatory. We are formulating whole new policies.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have been duly warned. We could make it at 2 p.m. and finished by 3 p.m.

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is okay.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The record will show that I am rearranging the meeting in order to facilitate Fianna Fáil's Front Bench. To recap, the select committee will meet at 9 a.m. next Wednesday, 17 May, in committee room 2 to consider the Criminal Justice (Victims of Crime) Bill 2016.

The following day, which is 18 May 2017, the joint committee will meet in private session at 2 p.m. in committee room 4. The following week on 24 May, it is all systems go for Deputy O'Callaghan's Parole Bill 2016 - with a money message.

The select committee is adjourned until next Wednesday, 17 May 2017.