Seanad debates

Thursday, 8 November 2018

Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of David NorrisDavid Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chair very much.

My concern is that we would allow a situation to continue under which the welfare, rights and dignity of citizens can be trampled over, with no comeback and nobody is accused, charged or affected in any way by that.

I wish to turn also to the troublesome bit of amendment No. 68, which proposes on page 20 to delete line 40. Let us delete line 40 as a start. Line 40 contains only one word, "Commission," and the proposal is to delete that. On page 21, we are deleting line 1 and substituting the word "Commission".Section 27(1)(b) reads, "the Director, a member of staff of the Office or a consultant, advisor or other person who is or was engaged under contract or other arrangement by the Commission," but what we have got rid of - and this has not been addressed by the Minister - is the remainder of that paragraph, which read, "unless he or she is duly authorised by the Commission to so do." As I understand it, that is gone. We have deleted it. I would like the Minister to refer to the necessity for this deletion because the purpose of amendment No. 68 is "to delete line 1". Line 1 includes the phrase "unless he or she is duly authorised by the Commission to so do". We are getting rid of that and substituting just the word "Commission", which is a leftover from the previous paragraph. We are actually deleting an entire idea. We are deleting the idea that somebody can in fact disclose information if "he or she is duly authorised by the Commission to so do." We are removing a significant flexibility from the legislation. Perhaps I am wrong but I do not think the Minister addressed this point.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.