Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

It is used more often in plain English. The Minister has rejected my amendment No. 51. In section 16(1) where it states: "Where a person has been sent forward for trial for an arrestable offence, a statement", I want to insert "contained in the book of evidence served on that person" after "statement" and before "relevant to the proceedings made by a witness". The Minister has accepted my amendment No. 53 relating to that section. The Minister explained that he will accept it more by way of courtesy than necessity. However, its inclusion is good enough for me and I will not be churlish and make more points in that regard.

The Minister is clearly more familiar with the courts system than I. While he may indicate otherwise, I am advised that the phrase I wanted to insert through amendment No. 51 is required to avoid ambush. The Minister has given assurances that all witness statements will be in the original book of evidence, but it is possible to issue new witness statements during the course of a trial. I am not sure how such works as I have no experience in these matters. I understood that the case needed to be laid out in advance and, where witnesses were to be called, the gist of their charges and statements needed to be laid out so that they could be rebutted.

The requirement provided by the amendment would not have caused difficulty, that is, to ensure that admitted witness statements were not produced out of the blue. Rather, they would be contained in the book of evidence. I must take the assurance of the Minister in that regard, but he might elaborate on what is normal procedure and give me an assurance that there will be no potential for ambush in the form of new witness statements being interjected in the middle of a trial, rather like Report Stage amendments in the face of the poor Opposition trying to cope with the Bill as already discussed.

I thank the Minister for accepting amendment No. 53. I do not know why he tabled his own amendment instead of accepting mine. Perhaps I have left out a comma or something.

See this speech in context