Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

The heads of the Bill which are under preparation will deal with this area and the question of people who die in State custody is de facto virtually always the subject of an inquest. It is not as if there is a practice among coroners that urgently needs change.

We have agreed to a very expeditious debate this evening. If I were to accept such a broad amendment it would to an extent be a fraud on the other Members because I agreed we would deal with this Bill in very short order with a guillotine motion attached. I do not want to do that in circumstances where the legislation needs to be carefully thought through.

The other Members thought, rightly, on the basis of the Second Stage debate, that this Stage would focus only on two fundamental issues. Extending the debate to a third area would involve legislating for a matter which we did not adequately signal to other Members, under a guillotine agreed on the basis of a narrow proposal.

I have no problem with the principle of the Deputy's amendment. For instance, under the Garda Ombudsman provisions in the Garda Síochána Act, mandatory inquiries are in place for circumstances such as this relating to the Garda Síochána. This does not apply to military or prison custody.

I want to carefully consider the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Other areas may need to be examined, such as provisions for people detained in psychiatric institutions and the like. If I was to accept the amendment this evening, I would be short-changing the Members who agreed to an attenuated passage of the Bill on the basis that it had a narrow focus.

See this speech in context