Feargal Quinn (Independent)

The comments of Senator Cummins were also made yesterday on Second Stage and, therefore, I will not repeat them. I was critical of the fact that a 64-page Bill was not given adequate attention in this House, but I will not resume that issue. I appreciate the comments of the Tánaiste explaining his view of the jury system. I was once on a jury and am aware it is a frustrating experience because of the array of decisions a jury has to make. Fortunately, the jury on which I served was dismissed and did not have to make any decisions as the 12 of us would have had great difficulty making our decisions.

The Minister spoke about a radical rebalance, based on the Hogan report, in a new Bill. On that basis, I support the change not being made in this Bill because the focus of this one is on gangland crime. Therefore, I do not want the Bill broadened further. A significant new Bill to deal with the issue might be required and I wonder whether the Tánaiste sees himself facing that task in the future and whether it would be a high priority. I believe it would be. I find it scary that we do not seem to have taken all the required steps with regard to interference with juries. I understand from what the Minister has said, that if new evidence comes through, the possibility of double jeopardy still exists. Will he say whether he sees himself giving priority to ensuring these areas are handled in a secondary Bill?