Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I welcome the Minister's last comment acknowledging undue delay, which is a great pity. The Minister responded to my colleague Deputy McManus in November 2005 in virtually the same form he gave to the Dáil last week, that the Department had asked the HSE for its views and told the House that the HSE had indicated it was examining the matter thoroughly and would revert to the Department shortly. That was last November. Last week the Minister told the House he telephoned the HSE. I presume this was to put pressure on them and find out what had happened since last November. I understand we will have an interim report within a week. We need to get procedures and mechanisms in place. Does the Minister accept that?

The Minister made great play last week of introducing the Bill into the House last Friday of this new, adversarial court procedure that is now being produced, in which young girls will be asked about the length of their skirts and so on. Does the Minister accept there was always the potential for an adversarial court procedure to arise given the traumatic nature of cross-examination in such cases?

Does the Minister accept that section 5 of the Bill that has been enacted worsens the situation because it opens the anomaly whereby the girl would have to have had penetrative sex in order to be innocent? One can imagine the cross-examination that will flow from that. Under the provision enacted into law by these Houses attempted sex would not be an offence for the girl in those circumstance and this would open her to greater cross-examination. Does the Minister accept we will have to revert to this?

Having accepted the urgency, can the Minister give us a timeframe for establishing the sort of video evidence that has been agreed since the Criminal Evidence Act 1992 was enacted?

See this speech in context