Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Coogan and Ms Maher for presenting. Unfortunately, I missed the previous briefings so maybe I will go over ground that has already been covered.

I would first like clarification that there is no need for retroactive provision in respect of case that have already been determined, there is no way in which there is any frailty for those. My second question relates to what the frailty was in respect of false evidence. Was it purely the fact no oath was taken or does this raise the need for some penalty provision being available to the WRC where someone fails to answer honestly? I thought penalties of that nature could not be imposed other than by a court. As a result, I am wondering exactly what line has been drawn by the Supreme Court.

Ms Coogan indicated there may be other policy matters raised by the judgment which may have to come back to the committee. Perhaps she will indicate what those might be.

I was involved when much of this reform went through. We were trying to reform an extremely legalistic provision where the process was slow, there was duplication and people were bringing in armies of lawyers. The process had become very legalistic. It is encouraging that it has stood the test of a challenge, other than in respect of what seemed relatively minor areas of difficulty, notwithstanding the importance of correcting them.

I commend the WRC on the work it has been doing and those who helped to bring through the reforms. They have made the process clearer, simpler, and more effective for people who need to vindicate their rights before the WRC.