Maria Corrigan (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister to the House. I support the legislation as necessary to ensure the safety of a small but vulnerable group of people. As the Minister observed, these are people who find themselves involuntarily detained for their own protection, whether as a consequence of being deemed a risk to their own or others' safety or because treatment in a safe environment was deemed to be of benefit to them. The passing of this legislation will prevent disruption to their treatment and any consequential setback to their recovery. As the Minister said, the legislation may prove unnecessary pending the outcome of the court case. I commend her on her proactive approach in avoiding any risk arising to these vulnerable people.

I am pleased to hear that since last Friday, approximately 209 reviews have been completed of the cases of people detained under renewal orders under section 15 of the Mental Health Act in order to confirm the justification of each person's continued detention. This is a considerable undertaking which provides reassurance as to the merits of putting in place this legislation as quickly as possible. I wholeheartedly commend those who undertook this review in such a short period. I acknowledge the Minister's comment that the necessity for this legislation may arise through the layout and contents of a form as opposed to an aspect of clinical practice.

There is always cause for concern when legislation must be taken quickly. I thank the Minister and her officials for the briefing they provided to us all earlier. I also welcome the Minister's assurances that no injustice has been caused to patients and that this emergency legislation to validate the detention of involuntarily detained patients relates to detentions which have been already the subject of a robust process. The legislation provides for five working days to make a replacement renewal order where appropriate for patients. Have the HSE and the private psychiatric hospitals indicated whether they have the capacity to undertake and complete this work? In asking this, I again acknowledge their work since last Friday. However, it is a considerable undertaking in a period of five working days.

Is it intended to introduce new forms to replace the queried forms? Will the new forms be introduced regardless of the outcome of the case? Given the questions that have arisen and the comments made about the forms, new forms would be entirely appropriate to facilitating professional discretion.

This legislation is clearly driven by a desire to protect a vulnerable group of people and, as such, I commend it to the House.