Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The matters proposed to be included are essentially matters that would form part of the State's proof in a criminal trial or hearing. This can be challenged by the defence and publicans or others in the usual way at a trial. That is already in place and it is applicable here. The Deputy suggests that by not including this the legislation could be unconstitutional. Constitutionally any person or publican who feels he or she has been wronged in terms of the immediate closure order that was presented, has a right to make that case. I misspoke earlier when I said he or she has a right of appeal. I meant he or she has an absolute right to raise any of the issues that have been listed by Deputy Howlin in his amendment. To set a precedent whereby we would outline and list the issues, while accepting that the Deputy has included "any other questions" is a matter for criminal procedure and evidence. I do not believe such a provision belongs in this particular section. I understand the point the Deputy makes in respect of the person who feels he or she was unfairly treated in the closure of his or premises and that decision being used in a subsequent hearing. Again, the powers we are giving to An Garda Síochána will be used only where, despite previous engagement, a serious breach has occurred which would warrant closure of the premises for the remainder of the day. A person will always have an opportunity later to raise the issues listed by the Deputy.

See this speech in context