Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

Following publication of this Bill by Deputy Shatter in January last, it received strong support from victim support groups such as AdVIC, Rape Crisis Network Ireland and the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. Further approbation came from the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Conor Lenihan, who observed on "Prime Time" on 22 May that Deputy Shatter has the best record of any Deputy in having successfully introduced Private Members' Bills into legislation and that the Government was "looking very carefully at his Bill because we believe it has a lot of merit in it".

The only criticism of the Bill came from the egotistical Minster for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Having been shown up in the Dáil last Thursday for his contempt of the critical motion on the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act 1998, he threw a public tantrum and claimed that Deputy Shatter's Victims' Rights Bill was legislation by Google. This was an ill-informed and ill-judged comment from a small-minded, partisan Minister whose arrogance and conceit are unequalled in this House.

One would expect that after almost 20 years in ministerial office, he would have realised that much of our legislative programme, particularly in the justice area, relies heavily on experience and practice in countries which share a common law tradition. The Minister's unworthy comments have drawn laughter and derision as well as annoyance and frustration from Members in this House and victims' campaigners and families in the wider community. The new Minister has demonstrated the vacuum in his knowledge of legal systems, jurisprudence and the workings of his own Parliamentary Counsel. To suggest that reflection on other legal systems in making new law or recommendations is somehow erroneous and flawed shows how out of touch he is.

Even more damaging was an attempt by his spin doctors to implicate officials in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who were reported as leading the charge against the Fine Gael Bill. Who are these officials? I challenge the Minister to name them. The truth is they are hired hands the Minister has brought in to foster and promote the nakedly opportune manner of his behaviour since his appointment to his new portfolio. He and his merchants of spin got to work to save his skin in the heat of an embarrassing situation. The Minister's predecessors sought and received co-operation on an all-party basis from this party and others on justice measures, while he has shown by his disgraceful antics that if he wants co-operation he will have to earn it.

The Law Reform Commission in every report it publishes, invests significant effort in examining the legal systems in other common law countries. Judges of the High and Supreme Courts invest significant effort in considering the arguments of judges in other common law countries. The keynote speaker at the public consultation on the third programme for law reform was none other than Judge Michael Kirby of the Australian High Court who spoke about how we in Ireland should approach law reform in this country, based on his experience as chairman of the Australian law reform commission. Our legal systems, as the Minister is well aware, are inextricably linked and are based on learning from each other and developing laws in tandem with emerging principles in similar states.

There is a simple reason for this, that is, we are a small country. In the same way we open our markets and business we open our minds to the other systems where they do things better, more successfully and more efficiently. The Minister's Department officials know this well and he might have consulted them before he threw this public wobbly. If the Minister had asked his officials, they could have told him that many Bills of his own Government have significant links with international precedents. The Immigration Bill 2008, published earlier this year by his predecessor, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is directly informed by the Immigration Bill 2007 published in the New Zealand Parliament. The e-Commerce Act is exactly similar to Australian e-commerce legislation. Most company law Acts here come directly from UK company law. In fact when the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 was first published it was such a close copy of its sister UK 1988 Act that large chunks of it had to be redrafted for it to make sense in the Irish context. This is perfectly normal. It makes common sense to learn from the developments and approaches in other common law countries particularly for a small jurisdiction such as ours. This is evidenced by the frequency with which lawyers, judges, law reform commissions, legal academics and even the Government's statutory draftsmen have referred to principles of law in other jurisdictions.

This is the first time criticism of this kind has been levelled at Irish legislation. Not only is it illogical, it is utter nonsense and it says more about the person making the allegations and their competence than anything else. We are witnessing a Minister and a Government who refuse to accept that the source of legislation can be from a forum other than Government. This long overdue legislation will not be on the Statute Book, as the Minister said, for at least 18 months.

This legislation is about victims. It is about ensuring that victims and their families can be given centre stage in our legislation. The sensible approach is to accept the Bill this evening, carry out improvements, deal with amendments in the normal way, have an all-party committee dealing with the issue and the Bill, as amended, could become law by October. The Bill, as amended if necessary, would improve the position of the vulnerable men, women and children who have already been significantly hurt by crime. The Minister's careless attitude and delaying tactic is another example of how the Government puts narrow partisan political interests ahead of victims and their families. He now has an opportunity to accept this Fine Gael legislation and to deal with any difficulties he may have on Committee Stage. He should put victims and their families and improvements in the criminal justice system before his own ego.

See this speech in context