Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will come in again briefly, if I may, on the issue of the affidavits.

The Minister refers specifically to section 37 which states that, "The Scheme may, in accordance with regulations under section 38, provide financial support". The word "may" is very subjective. My fear relates to people who are not on the database who wish to make an application and have to procure an affidavit. I am seeking greater certainty for such applicants and to prevent a situation where it becomes de rigueuror a de facto requirement for people to make an affidavit. When you enter that realm, you enter the realm of costs. If the wording of the legislation is not secure enough with regard to covering costs, people may be discouraged from making affidavits. What I am seeking is, quite simply, greater certainty for applicants who are not on the database and who require an affidavit and for the wording of the legislation to be such that there can be no ambiguity that, in dealing with the organisation the Minister is to set up within his Department - I do not mean to sound facetious about that - no one will come a cropper when seeking to make an affidavit in as seamless a way as possible and without being left out of pocket. The making of an affidavit is a complex process, as anyone who has ever made an affidavit in civic life will know. There is more involved than just spending an hour with a solicitor. There can be hours and days of work involved in making an affidavit. Where are the costs involved to fall? I just want more certainty on that point.

I have also made the point that people who access the redress scheme and receive a payment are disbarred from initiating litigation or waive their right to do so. I do not know if it is a precedent but the symphysiotomy payment scheme did not require or compel any woman to forgo her right to initiate legal proceedings after the fact. There is an issue with regard to the legal element of this legislation that we need to have greater certainty on. The wording needs to be more watertight.

See this speech in context