David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We were told we could discuss it with regard to amendments Nos. 66 to 71. Subsection 2 states:

Where any of the judicial offices to which this section applies stands vacant or where the Minister reasonably apprehends that any of those offices will stand vacant, the Minister shall request the Senior Judicial Appointments Committee (in this section referred to as “the Committee”) of the Government.

What will the Minister request it to do? It does not say. It is daft. It just states the Minister shall "request", and leaves it hanging there. I think there is a mistake or misprint there. Perhaps Senator McDowell could elucidate when it comes to that.

Turning to amendments Nos. 66 to 71, No. 66 reads:

In page 20, line 34, after “not” to insert the following:“, without the consent in writing of the Commission or (save where the intending discloser is the Director) the Director or except as required by law or in the circumstances provided for in subsection (3),”.

This is the Minister meeting some of the arguments of the Seanad. Up until this, apparently, it would be an offence even to communicate in the gardaí in a situation where somebody who was on the judicial appointments commission knew that some malpractice or criminal activity had taken place. The Minister is closing this loophole by saying that they can make such a disclosure if it is as required by law.

Amendment No. 67 deletes lines 38 to 40. The way it is done is not necessary. One could just delete the second two and a half lines that read:

In page 20, to delete lines 38 to 40 and substitute the following:“(b) the Director or a member of staff of the Office,”.

By and large, I agree strongly with the amendments Senator McDowell has tabled but it seems to me that if he does that - and in section 27(1)(b) there is just the director or member of staff of the office - he is effectively removing "consultant, advisor or other person who is or was engaged under contract" but I do not really understand why.