Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

Given the facts outlined by the Taoiseach, one would expect him to have the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform attend to these issues rather than reheat old tax plans or create diversions.

I want to raise a different aspect of the criminal justice system with the Taoiseach. It is a sensitive matter and I regret any invasions of privacy caused by discussing the health of a retired distinguished public servant, Dr. John Harbison. However, fundamental questions arise with regard to public policy and the integrity of the expert forensic services supplied by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to the criminal justice system. The outcome of the Annabel's case was deeply distressing for all concerned and I know people on every side of the House feel the pain of the parents of Brian Murphy. I ask the Taoiseach whether any other explanation exists for the stark difference of opinion between two professionals, other than that Dr. Harbison is ill.

It is important to note this is not the responsibility of the DPP. In recent days, the Minister has stated on a number of occasions that the office of the DPP is separate and we know that. The fact is that the State pathology service is appointed, funded and administered by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and, therefore, it and the Minister are responsible for the service. Over the weekend, it was leaked that the former State pathologist is ill and will not be able to give evidence in future cases. Questions now arise about his past capacity to perform post mortems and his ability to give evidence in future. When did the Minister know about the health problems of the former State pathologist? Did he know this unavailability would impact on future cases or that the past as well as future competence of the former State pathologist might be at issue? When did the Minister put all the information he had into the possession of the DPP?

Will the Taoiseach arrange for the Minister to make a full statement before the House? Last night, the Minister sought to announce that he would reform the law to preserve the taking of depositions so statements could be put in evidence in the future. However, when challenged on a television programme last night, he immediately backtracked and admitted that it was nonsense that someone could submit such evidence without being subject to cross-examination. We need to hear from the Minister and, in the interim, the Taoiseach needs to reassure us as to whether it is expected that convictions will be open to challenge as a result of the information which has come to light.

See this speech in context