Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

I echo the points other Deputies have made with regard to the family home. I will not repeat them because they have been well made. The Minister of State has not responded to the salient points I made in my earlier contribution regarding the deficiencies in the provision in section 7E on page 12 of the Bill as presented at this stage. This is important because the Minister of State has drawn comparisons with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The appeals office for social welfare claims is independent of the Department but what the Minister of State is proposing here is different. One must look at the formulation of words. The Bill states that "Where the Executive receives an appeal" — which is almost suggested as an improbability — "under subsection (1), it shall appoint a person (who may be an employee of the Executive) to consider the appeal."

Deputy Twomey's proposed amendment states very clearly that the appeals officer, as opposed to a person appointed to examine an appeal when it presents, is designated by the Minister and not by the HSE. Where do we ever draw the line on the police policing themselves? Here we have the HSE acting as it may in terms of appointing an employee of the executive to consider an appeal. It should be at some remove from that. Amendment No. 3 clearly states "designated by the Minister" and not by the HSE. This is another very important point in ensuring public confidence. That is what is required and it is absolutely necessary. I understand that is the way the social welfare appeals system operates. Let us recognise the deficiencies and not try to defend the indefensible. The Minister of State has acknowledged that this Bill is not the be-all and end-all and quite clearly, that is the case. Let us at least ensure that key and critical elements of this legislation meet the requirement of providing a sounder basis than that which has previously applied.

See this speech in context