Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

I am bound to say that I have serious apprehensions about what three judges will say when confronted with a retired Garda presenting expert opinion as to the existence of a gang. That is a complete novelty in Irish criminal law. Somebody retired from the force could be brought in, and there is no specification of the person retiring last week, ten years ago or what that person does now. Will we have columnists for the Evening Herald giving expert testimony? It is a worrying addition.

I support the amendment by Deputy Flanagan as the point of the exercise is not clear if we consider the process, unless it is the first step in leading to the ultimate conviction. In that sense, all that is being suggested is that the safeguard of corroborative evidence would be provided for.

It is very well for the Minister to take up a stance of opposition to everything we say in the House and he is probably buoyed by the fact that much of the noise outside is supportive. Why would the latter not be the case? Every right-thinking citizen wants to put these gangsters behind bars. However, we cannot just go along with the loudest laugh that declares the empty mind. It is our job to probe, test and scrutinise the legislation.

The Minister cannot afford to allow something to pass which is likely to be the cause of a constitutional action and which will lead to the implementation of the legislation being delayed by 18 months or two years. I presume the latter would be the last thing the Minister would want to happen. The amendment offers what is no more than a reasonable safeguard. As the Minister indicated, we discussed the matter at some length last night but I merely wished to outline my view.

See this speech in context