Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail)

-----but I fully expect the Minister to reply again with personalised comments. No criticism of the Minister was made in the debate on this Bill. We simply said there is a back story here involving the Department. My recollection is that I said the Minister was perhaps not aware of the situation that was relayed to Members of this House. When concerns are raised it is correct that we raise them when dealing with legislation in the Seanad. My appeal to the Minister on Second Stage was that he listen seriously to the concerns raised, withdraw the Bill and look again at the matter. It appears that this Bill will benefit one individual, if that is possible after this debate. However, it is not about this individual but about the entire process and the idea that legislation could possibly relate to one individual and be concerned with allowing that person to get a promotion.

The appointment of judges, whether it is in the civil or military court system, should be as open and transparent as possible. Certainly, representative bodies should not get involved in it. I do not know of any precedent for the Bar Council or the Law Society getting a legal opinion as to whether somebody has legitimate expectations when it is my understanding that the person was not qualified at all. It is particularly a matter of concern in the military. As we have said, the pool of people is so small that the chances are that they might know somebody who might be before them.

It is not fair to dismiss the amendments put forward by my party colleague, Senator Mullen, and Senator Quinn relating to reducing the time limit. Yes, there might be five or six people who would benefit from that, but they are certainly not known to me. The intent of the amendment is genuine and sincere. It is at least an attempt to broaden the procedure. It is unacceptable that a person's qualifications for the position of judge can be decided on an ad hoc basis and not set down clearly in legislation.

I ask the Minister to accept that what has been said on this side of the House has been genuine. Information has been given to us and we should pass that information on in the course of a Seanad debate. Perhaps we would have more time to debate these issues if we were not faced with a rush of legislation on various matters. I did not raise it at the time but yesterday, for example, it was unfortunate that the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill contained no mention of the Official Languages Act in the Long Title. Somebody who is not-----