Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)

I have been looking at the section not from a critical viewpoint because I like the idea involved. Perhaps now is the time to try to find holes in it, however. What if the person charged is illiterate, if that is the politically correct term, and unable to produce a written statement? It must also be signed by the applicant. I have occasionally come across cases where an individual has signed with a mark because he or she cannot sign his or her name.

I agree with the intent of the section. However, in the case of an individual with many convictions, he or she may not have the information to hand and cannot properly fill out the bail application. I have often seen cases where there is a reference to, say, 39 previous convictions. From a practical viewpoint, an applicant could be honestly unable to complete a bail statement because it would be impossible to remember, say, all 39 previous convictions.

Subsection (7) states, "any witness may, with the leave of the court, be examined on the content of the statement". Should this be "applicant" as the section refers to bail applications? The preceding subsection states, "the statement shall be received in evidence ... if it purports to be signed by the applicant".

The section also refers to improper publication where the court may by order direct that no information be broadcast or published. What will be the consequences of breaches of such an order? Is an offence for this created later in the legislation?

See this speech in context