Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to the House, and I welcome this legislation. The issue has been raised previously by the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights in reports on some of the investigations and inquiries held into people killed arising from British collusion in this jurisdiction during the Troubles of the past 30 years.

It is an initiative that has been sought by the Coroners Society of Ireland, the Coroners Review Group and the Coroners Rules Committee in 2003. It is to equip coroners to conduct the best possible investigations into death. Perhaps as we explore the Bill we can bear this in mind and see whether it achieves that.

There are two broad parameters to the legislation. One is to widen the scope of the inquest and the remit of the coroner from investigating the proximate cause of death to establishing the circumstances. Then there is the development of the structures and administration within the coroner service. In that regard, it is important we seek to ensure there is no possibility of any intrusion into the independence of coroners' investigations and how they make their decisions.

It will be a new full-time coroner service, co-ordinated at national level under the aegis of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. As the Minister said, it is intended that it will be done regionally. I note Senator Regan has welcomed the fact that it is to be a full-time service and I have no doubt there is a need for a move in that direction. However, will all coroners need to be full-time? We have a system which, despite its flaws and shortcomings, operates with reasonable success on a part-time basis. There is also the question of expertise which may be lost because we are moving from a part-time to a full-time service. This is something that might, perhaps, be examined.

There is a statutory entitlement in the Bill for a coroner to receive assistance from the Garda Síochána. A garda can carry out a direction of the coroner only if the Commissioner accepts it is not in conflict with any given by the Commissioner. To some extent, that perhaps impinges on the independence of the coroner. Perhaps there will be cases in which it will be necessary to address that. Section 21(5) states: "A member of the Garda Síochána shall not act as a coroner's officer in any investigation by a coroner into a death of a person in or immediately after being in Garda custody". I see reasons for that but how does the coroner fill that void?

I refer to the qualifications. To become a chief coroner, an assistant coroner or a coroner, one must have ten years' experience either as a barrister or a practising solicitor or be a registered medical practitioner. What is the practice internationally in that regard? To the best of my knowledge, this provision would not debar any existing barristers. However, that a coroner may come from one of two professions indicates there will be a deficit in the expertise of a coroner in one of the disciplines. I accept that person can fill that deficit through other means. The corollary is that a person who has a deficit in both disciplines could, if he or she had the aptitude and ability, do the job effectively by filling both of those deficits. A person who is a medical practitioner would obviously have a greater understanding of the results of a post mortem. That a coroner can come from one of two professions shows that if he or she does not have the expertise, compensatory mechanisms can be put in place.

To some extent, we are talking about two very sheltered professions which have not really been tackled from a competition point of view and I suppose I come with that baggage to this debate. We have been very remiss in not addressing that issue. I compliment the Minister for Health and Children for her courage in taking on vested interests in the health service. I have not seen the same enthusiasm for taking on the vested interests in the legal profession. The country could benefit from doing that.