Marie Sherlock (Labour) | Oireachtas source

I congratulate the Minister on her new role. I am conscious that she appeared in the House for another Bill, but this is my first time speaking on a justice Bill and I want to wish her well.

The Labour Party is happy to support the Bill, which contains several measures that have been long sought after by the legal profession. One of those measures is the introduction of electronic filing and the issuing of documents from court offices. This positive change will save solicitors and others significant costs and time. However, what are the Minister's plans for introducing e-conveyancing? That measure would greatly reduce the amount of time and money spent by those working in the law, but it is not obviously contained in the Bill.

The Bill provides for remote hearings. Many of us who have been teleworking and continue to work from home hope that this will remain a feature of the post-pandemic world of work and the justice system in particular. However, we have a query pertaining to section 11(6)(b)(ii). Is it practicable to assert that a witness giving evidence by remote line, potentially from outside the State, is subject to the same obligations and liability as a witness present in court? Could such a witness be found guilty of contempt in the face of court and be committed to prison? This is an important point on which we need clarity, as it would have significant implications were an inaccuracy contained in the Bill.

Under Part 2, we welcome the measures to appoint temporary coroners when mass deaths necessitate a high number of inquests. None of us wants to think about an incident taking place that would require such a measure, for example, an act of terror or an outbreak of illness, but it is critical that a backlog of inquests not develop. A backlog forces bereaved families to wait for answers about their loved ones' deaths and reduces access to funeral grants, life assurance and other vital financial supports. This is a difficult subject to think about, but we must be prepared for it during the time of coronavirus and into the future.

Another change contained in the Bill is to be enthusiastically welcomed, that being, the new statement of truth under section 21. We understand that it will replace affidavits and statutory declarations and will not include the religious oath. Since the Labour Party has long stood for the principle of secularism, this is a welcome measure. We live in a pluralist society and it is important that this reality be reflected throughout every branch of the State. My final point, which has already been raised by Seanadóir Ó Donnghaile, Senator Mullen and others, is on pre-legislative scrutiny. I accept that this is not necessarily practicable for emergency legislation, but this Bill and others that are due to be taken by the House over the coming days include reform measures that are not intended to deal specifically with the pandemic. In particular, Chapter 3 of the Bill contains the general amendment to the law of civil evidence to allow for the admissibility of business records in a simplified way. This is a permanent amendment to the law and not something that relates to Covid-19.

Overall, the Bill contains a number of positive changes to streamline many of the more cumbersome processes of legal proceedings. I join other Senators in calling for a more comprehensive reform, which I hope will be forthcoming sooner rather than later. The virus has shown to be predictable only its unpredictability. Bearing that in mind, these immediate changes are warranted and we are happy to support them.