Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I won the case in the High Court but the State appealed the decision. However, I won in the Supreme Court. I mention this not because I have a legal background, but because I learned enough about legislation way back in 1971 to realise there is always the possibility of dangerous legislation being enacted. Since I came a Member of this House 19 years ago, I have seen a few efforts being made to introduce legislation which would have had retrospective effect and in practically every case the relevant Minister decided not to go ahead with it. This is one of the exceptions. However, a mistake has been made. We should have had the directive transposed before 5 December and the legislation should have copied the directive word for word, but we have not done this. The phrase "at least" was inserted when there was no need to do so. I do not know why the legislation has been changed, but that is not a point I wish to make now. The point I wish to make is that this legislation is being backdated to give it retrospective effect and that, on that basis, it should not go through. I, therefore, urge the Minister of State to accept the amendment.