Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

On Second Stage, other Members and I confirmed our welcome of the intent of this legislation. This welcome did not need to be repeated in our contributions at the outset of Report Stage. However, the concerns we expressed on Committee Stage and now again on Report Stage are real and substantive. They are not our concerns in the first instance; they are the concerns of those who will be directly affected by the change. Those fears are real and substantial.

We are not being asked to substitute; that is not the task before us but, as legislators, we have a duty to provide the greatest protections possible. We do so across a range of other areas from time to time. We build into legislation clear direction as regard to the legislators' wish. We do not leave legislation to the widest possible interpretation, nor do we kick the ball to somebody else to make a decision. The courts interpret our work almost daily but legislators always endeavour to give the clearest direction possible. We have concerns about AEDs. I am certainly concerned that we are not reflecting the real fears that have been expressed to us. As I will argue in respect of amendments Nos. 4 and 18, these fears are absolutely justified based on the experience of epilepsy sufferers whose medication has been already substituted by pharmacists mindful of the change but unaware that it had not already come into play.

See this speech in context