Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I also support the amendment. The Minister's response was that the period will be one year. A day is a long time in politics, as is a week, but a year for the Courts Service could be minuscule. I have personal experience of being in and out of court. The Circuit Court in Tipperary only sits three times a year, when it sits for eight days in a fortnight. My case could not be dealt with in eight days so it was put off until the next sitting, and the next one and the one after that. It could have gone on for five years except that I demanded a special hearing and was fortunate to get it. A year in that context is nonsensical. We are dealing with sexual crimes and other heinous crimes. We all support the aim behind the Bill but I am shocked - not surprised - to hear what Deputy Pringle discovered when he made inquiries and the information Deputy Howlin garnered as a result of checking matters.

Legislation is dealt with here in good faith. There are amendments, people spend a lot of time on them, and there is pre-legislative scrutiny. The Ceann Comhairle noted this morning at the meeting of the Business Committee - he has done so at every meeting we have had this year - how there are requests to waive pre-legislative scrutiny and how important pre-legislative scrutiny is. As far as I can see, however, there is no post-legislative scrutiny. Once legislation is passed, parts of it may never be enacted. I was aware of that long before today. A Minister or his or her officials may not like certain parts of an Act and they would never have the statutory instruments or whatever signed to commence them. Gardaí are meant to understand the legislation. We have an understanding of the legislation we pass but it might not be enacted even after due process, going through the various Stages and being adjudicated on by the President, signed and prepared for the enactment orders to be made.

Deputy Catherine Murphy made an important point about this year. The year is gone - it is one year to the day since Covid's impact was first really felt here - and another six months will be gone. The courts are not even sitting - they have very limited time on Zoom. When there is limited time, a trial could go on for five, six, eight or even ten years or it might never be heard. The Minister says that it has to go to the Uachtaráin and be signed but we have no idea and no way of tracing whether the various parts are enacted. We need a period of at least three years. The Minister said that five years is too long but I do not believe it is. There are cases that are languishing in the courts. A judge might ask well-informed barristers to indicate how long they think a case will take and they might say ten days. With sessions comprising only eight-day sittings in several regions three times a year, a case might never be heard. My case took 17 and a half days, so it would never have been heard. One would be in and out of court and then there is the cost involved and the delay in getting justice. The cost to me of that case, and to anyone who does not receive free legal aid, was enormous. It is a costly justice system.

It has been suggested that we have the avenue of parliamentary questions. We are ridiculed in sections of the media for asking, as they see it, frivolous parliamentary questions.

There is a cost to the Exchequer associated with parliamentary questions as well, and they are quite onerous for Departments to answer. It is a nonsense to suggest going down that road. We have so many bodies, or quangos as I call them. We need some oversight of legislation once it has been passed and signed into law by the President - or not - and its outworkings. We should be told if parts of legislation are not enacted and given reasons for that. There must be some kind of annual report. That is a big job of work but we need oversight of legislation once it leaves the Oireachtas regarding how it is bedding in, whether it has been used and the outcomes. There are enormous challenges in this area. A year is wholly inadequate because, as I said, legislation may not be tested in the courts within a year or a case under an Act may not be heard within a year. That is a weak argument from the Minister. I know personally how a case can go on and on. There is a possibility that a court case could go on for ten years and never be heard. There have been such cases. We definitely need some sort of oversight, whether that means the legislation going back to the Joint Committee on Justice or wherever. I am not too interested in the creation of another quango, but we need some oversight of legislation once it has been enacted regarding how it is bedding in, whether there been many cases, if we have case histories and if good or bad precedents have been set. We need a review.

I return to what Deputy Howlin said about the Children Act 2001. We are amending that legislation today, some 20 years later. That is just too slow when we are dealing with crimes against children, heinous crimes, sexual crimes or any crimes for that matter. Justice delayed is justice denied. I am fearful that if this amendment is not accepted, the legislation will gather dust. Parts of it might be implemented but there may be parts that are not suited to officialdom or whatever. We are the representatives elected to make legislation and we are accountable to the people.

See this speech in context