Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I do not think it is a big deal. The Minister of State has zoned in on the reasons only being required if the index is not being changed, but one could also provide a statement on the reasons it was being changed. That is not a stumbling block for the acceptance of the amendment which we put forward in the context of there being huge concern about the issue. Many people are considering the legislation and many are concerned that the right index may not have been chosen. As an index is being introduced in the primary legislation that is against the best advice of those asked to consult on it, we have come up on the wrong side of the advice offered. Therefore, in terms of the review, what is to stop these valid viewpoints or concerns being articulated therein or how do we know that they will be taken into account or what criteria will be used? One could argue that it reflects a nervousness that the Government might not be forthcoming in reviewing the orders because oddly it has chosen a method that was not favoured by the consulted groups. It is not personal. It may not even be this Government that will be responsible for the review in five years' time. There should be an accountability mechanism in place such that people would know the reasons the index was not being changed, even though the expert advice had not been heeded the first time the index was brought in. In view of the fact that the review will only happen in five years' time and perhaps periodically thereafter, it is not a hugely taxing amendment and I do not think it is a big deal. It would not require the report to be discussed by the Oireachtas but only to be laid before the House. It is a relatively simple proposal.

See this speech in context