Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I do not have any interest in leaving this Bill on the Order Paper for a further six months. This matter could have been addressed tonight or almost five years ago. There is virtually no difference between the Bill recommended by the Law Reform Commission which served as the basis for this legislation and the original Bill presented by the Fine Gael Party four and a half years ago. The provisions in the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill the Government has promised to introduce before 2 September will not be any different either. I do not believe the Government will survive long enough to introduce the promised legislation. For this reason, it should be dealt with tonight.

I thank the Deputies who spoke on the Bill, Deputy Flanagan who tabled it with me, my constituency and party colleague, Deputy Doyle, and others. I also thank Deputies Kathleen Lynch and Costello who spoke on behalf of the Labour Party. Deputy Lynch also spoke on the previous Bill four and a half years ago. Nothing has been done in the meantime. At the time we attributed the failure to proceed with legislation on this issue to the arrogance of the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Mr. Michael McDowell. However, when one compares him with the individuals who hold Cabinet positions today, the former Minister becomes something of a Florence Nightingale figure. I am deeply surprised that pragmatic individuals such as Deputy Healy-Rae and others continue to support this arrogant Government which is out of touch with society.

In commending the Law Reform Commission I note with surprise that, under the chairmanship of Ms Justice Catherine McGuinness, it has been subject to some implied criticism by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Last night the Minister asked the following question: "For example, should the advice, assistance or care given by a good samaritan or volunteer be restricted to the scene of an accident or should it include transportation to a hospital or other medical care facility?" The answer is spelled out in section 3(2) which refers to "or other circumstance of serious and imminent danger".

The Minister also asked how far into the future protection from liability should stretch. I look forward to seeing how he proposes to address this spurious argument in his Bill. He has also asked who is a good samaritan and whether a person who injures someone and then assists the injured party can be described as a good samaritan. Section 3(3) clearly defines a good samaritan and does not leave room for ambiguity. If there was a difficulty with the Bill, it could have been addressed by amendment on Committee Stage. I do not believe any such difficulty arises. The Government's approach is reflective of the arrogance that has prevailed among its members for some years.

The Law Reform Commission has produced two reports and has been examining the concept behind the Bill which originated on this side of the House for four and a half years. It produced a Bill, of which this legislation is a replica. The Fine Gael Party used the commission's Bill in the belief the Government would not close the door on the commission. For self-centred reasons, however, it chose to do precisely that.

Deputy Flanagan outlined the heads of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill last night. While I do not know if we will be around in 30 years when the relevant Cabinet papers are released, I doubt if good samaritan legislation was discussed in the context of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.

Deputy Joe Carey made a good point when he noted that the Minister could expedite the passage of the Bill by tacking it onto the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009. The Government could just as well have done so, given that it proposes to include it in the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, the heads of which do not even refer to a good samaritan.

My motivation for introducing the Bill was purely to assist volunteers. I have listened to mothers of children who died suddenly from cardiac arrest and representatives of voluntary groups. Deputy Doyle and I could have filled the Visitors Gallery with 500 volunteers from County Wicklow alone. I have in mind people such as Mr. John Fitzgerald who sits on the committee of the Wicklow community first responders, Mr. John O'Reilly, Ms Margaret Lynagh, Mr. Pat Dignam and Ms Susan Gorman.

When I left the House last night following the debate on the Bill, there were no microphones, flashing cameras or lights. I also note there is only one member of the media in the Press Gallery and the scant coverage given to the legislation. The Bill tells me more about the Government than anything else. I hope that when my party is sitting on the other side of the House in a few months from now, we will introduce this legislation. If my party colleagues and I are fortunate enough to be elected to the House at the next election, I hope we never indulge in the patronising waffle I have heard from the Government side. Rather than blaming Deputies O'Connor, Conlon and Dooley for this, I blame the Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Health and Children, both of whom are aware of the importance of this issue.

I feel sorry for the officials present because I am sure that deep down they want to accept the legislation and know it would only do good at no cost. Large sections of the community want the Bill to be enacted. We could have lobbied and generated opposition to the Government's approach to it but instead chose to take a non-party political approach and remain silent until we discovered that the Government's position was that it would not accept the Bill. It adopted this position because it is arrogant and out of touch.

When the Government was formed, we had a budget surplus and thousands of new jobs were being created every year. What do we have now? The national debt has trebled in five or six months and thousands are losing their jobs every month. In response to an Opposition proposal, we have encountered again the arrogance that is symptomatic of the Government. I do not think that 30 seconds would do justice to the anger and despair I feel at the Government's approach. A reference as made to the Taoiseach seeking proposals from this side of the House, yet here is a proposal that, strangely enough, everyone spoke in favour of. In the wilds of south west Kerry, isolated people are dying from sudden cardiac arrest, but community organisations are afraid to get involved for fear of litigation. I cannot understand why Deputy Healy-Rae and his Independent colleagues will not support a Bill that would not cost one cent. It would have given a voice to the many reports on volunteerism and active citizenship.

Spare me all the waffle I have heard from the Government benches. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context