Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

While this is not one of the more important sections of the Bill, there are still issues like aptitude, attitude and attributes that arise in respect of the people appointed. Effectively, they are all-powerful positions. Ultimately, their opinions cannot be challenged in the normal way. I know we will come to the section dealing with the restrictions on what can be appealed to the courts, but I understand there are only two grounds on which a case can be taken. First, the appellant is not the person on whom the notice should have been served. Second, there is some substantive or procedural illegality. What is not challengeable is the opinion of the inspectors themselves. Therefore, if we do not have people with the attitude and impartiality required to administer this properly, we will run into difficulties. By extending it beyond those in the public service, we are running into issues such as people who may have had previous difficulties with the person whose septic tank they are inspecting.

There are serious issues pertaining to this and opinions should be challengeable. It strikes me as very odd that if a person is being inspected, he cannot get his own expert to make a professional evaluation that would have some status. Such an evaluation cannot even be used a foundation for a legal challenge. That is highly questionable. If this is the case, it puts a lot of emphasis on recruitment and the people who will be involved in these inspections.