David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

I call on the Minister to forgive me for repeating some points already made. I was attending a meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children so I missed some of the earlier exchanges.

Like previous speakers I support the intention behind the publication of the Bill. I commend Senator Leyden on bringing forward the Bill. However, I agree with some of the points of legal concern that were raised. Perhaps the Minister could take those points on board and the Government could introduce amendments or a new Bill to address the issues. I would support Senator Leyden in bringing the Bill before the House.

It is clear to me that there are advantages to such a scheme, which would help prevent situations in which families are unable to locate wills, leading to frustration of the intentions of the testator and loss on the part of the intended beneficiaries. As speakers have noted, it can be difficult to locate wills as their details may be recorded in no way other than in the books of the local solicitor. It is desirable that there is a relatively comprehensive register of wills to which the beneficiaries or family could refer rather than trawling through the offices of various solicitors. There are 2,300 practices in the State, so a way of avoiding this would be welcome. In addition, there is a need for the registration of wills to be put on a statutory basis. This is something that is long overdue.

Section 11, which provides for the privacy of wills, is important. Wills are documents that are produced in sensitive circumstances and the law of probate is littered with tales of families, as we can all testify to, in which there are divisions over testamentary gifts and fallings out over promises of gifts. It is essential that the details of wills are kept as private as possible. Centralisation of the actual wills, as opposed to the detail of the wills, would be a more dangerous and potentially controversial issue; however, this is not provided for in this Bill. Provided the vital safeguards to protect privacy were maintained, it would be a positive addition to the administration of wills if it were adopted at some stage.

I wish to take the opportunity to make one or two general observations in this area, which is a complex and intricate corpus of law in and of itself. Senator Bacik spoke about the fear that some people have of making a will. My wife, a year ago, was the one to suggest that we make a will, and I wondered why it was so important. Now that we have two children - we had a new baby last week - we must amend the will. It was only when I was spoke with the solicitor, going through the various questions that are asked about who would take care of the child if something happened, that the importance of wills was brought home to me. We need to encourage as many people as possible to make wills. The figures show that over two thirds of adults have not made a will, which is shocking. This should be addressed. The passage of a Bill similar to the one proposed here could provide an opportunity for people to write their wills.

A related area of law is that of wardship of persons who are deemed not to be capable, whether that capacity is related to the making of a will or the giving of consent to something. This generally refers to those with intellectual disabilities. The issue may have been raised earlier, but wardship is a 19th-century concept that needs modernisation. The legislation is seriously antiquated and there is an urgent need for new legislation to modernise the area. While the Mental Capacity Bill 2008 was a step forward, we are still largely covered by the Lunacy Regulation (Ireland) Act 1871. A person who is a ward of court cannot marry, defend or initiate legal proceedings or transfer residence without permission from the High Court. It is a totally black and white system which allows for the total loss of control of one's self and one's estate. There are no grey areas. The consequences for someone who is made a ward of court are major.

Due to the requirements that Ireland must satisfy as a signatory of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, this is an area of law that we must reform. I ask the Minister whether there is an intention to move forward and ratify the convention to which we are a signatory. It is an affront to human rights to allow those with intellectual disabilities to suffer from such a system. Inclusion Ireland and Amnesty International are among those who have called for new legislation.

As I said earlier, I welcome the introduction of this Bill and commend Senator Leyden on its introduction. I share the concerns raised by Government spokespersons about legal issues. We have spoken a number of times over the last week about rushed legislation, and some legislation was guillotined in this Chamber. Issues such as this are so important that we have to get it right, so if there are legal issues that need to be considered they should be considered at length. We should not rush into introducing a Bill of such importance. I hope, if the Government is to oppose this Bill, that it will introduce a similar Bill which will address some of the concerns that spokespersons from the Minister's own party and her coalition colleagues, the Fine Gael representatives, have raised today. I thank the Minister for attending the House.