Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

We definitely acknowledge and appreciate that the Government has tabled amendment No. 7 in the first place. It arose out of the Committee Stage debate and issues we raised. It is broadly similar to amendment No. 8 but, as with many of our amendments, there are subtle differences. The subtle difference in this case is that ours provides that if a victim specifically requests that the information would be given to him or her orally, as opposed to in writing, or in writing as opposed to orally, the request "shall be" complied with. The Government's amendment, by comparison, uses the wording "in so far as is practicable". We believe that in the spirit of the victims directive, the obligation should be on the Garda. Where there is a deaf person, for example, there is no point in giving him or her the information orally. He or she should get it in writing. The garda could say he or she has not time to be giving the information in writing and that it is not practical but the obligation should be to meet the needs of the victim. The information we are talking about is critical information on which victims need to rely and that they need to understand. While we welcome the point made, if victims are to be discriminated against at this stage it would actually go against the spirit of the directive itself. It is better not to include "in so far as is practicable" and instead oblige the garda to give the information orally or in writing as the victim requests. Mine is a fairly minor request and I hope the Minister will agree with it.

See this speech in context