Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I apologise as I had intended to address this issue in my previous remarks. These provisions are not meant as an attack. What is envisaged by them is nothing more than what is set out here. The intention is that this should be an alternative. It is not meant as a replacement. The rules of court may provide for a statement of truth in place of an affidavit but this is obviously where the person so wishes. It is to try to ensure that we can create an efficiency, particularly in the context of the Covid-19 crisis and the inability of people to be able to sign a document in the presence of the required persons. This has been available to people, more so in Dublin, but in the more rural areas it has been a challenge. It is simply to provide greater efficiency, not to replace what is there. Following on from that, in the case of somebody giving oral evidence, a person can still be asked to give evidence on oath whether they have provided a statement of truth or an affidavit. We are not talking about removing the swearing of an oath or signing of an affidavit. It is meant as an addition to provide a greater efficiency where it is potentially not possible but it does not remove that possibility for a person who wishes to do so. That and nothing else is what is intended here.