Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed but not surprised by the Minister's response. As with amendments I sought to put forward last night, amendment No. 21 is constructive. It is very similar to amendments Nos. 27 to 29, inclusive, tabled by Senator McDowell. These amendments put forward what should be a non-controversial statement of principle upon which we should all be able to agree. Of course, members of the Public Appointments Service and the judicial appointments commission should uphold judicial independence in performing their functions. They should not, however, perform any of their functions for the purposes of seeking to influence the interpretation of the law or the Constitution by the courts. That is the very danger to which Senator McDowell referred. If a provision like this is not included in the Bill, then the suggestion the Senator made in respect of constitutional frailty will prove to be correct.

The Minister's approach to this is very similar to the way in which this Bill has been handled by the Government all along. Serious and constructive proposals have been put forward by many Opposition Senators on Committee Stage and now on Report Stage. Instead of engaging with us in a constructive way outside the Chamber through meetings - as stated previously, this route was followed with different Ministers in respect of other legislation - the approach taken has been not to brook either any compromise or any amendment.