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

I will outline the advice we have received. On the substitution of section 252, this would constitute a repeal and re-enactment with modifications which then engages section 26(2) of the Interpretation Act. The implications of the application of section 26(2) would need to be carefully considered and that it is not possible in the timeframe involved.

The advice is that amending section 252 is more transparent and clearer to the reader of the Bill, including to Members of the Houses, although there are different views on this in terms of which elements of the existing section 252 are being retained and what is new. The substitution approach would require the reader to essentially examine the new section in its entirety against the existing section 252 in its entirety.

The approach of substituting section 252 in its entirety has the effect of altering subsection numbers so that the existing section 252(2) would become section 252(5), with only a small change being made to it. Existing subsections (3) to (5), although identical to the current form, would become subsections (6) to (8). From a strict legal point of view, this might not be problematic. However, in other instances, in particular where we have documents or academic commentary or other situations, the changing of the numbers might lead to some confusion. It is, therefore, very much a case of trying to keep the text in line with the sections that are part of the current Act so that we can ensure consistency inasmuch as possible.

The policy, as has been set out in Senator McDowell's amendment, and what we are trying to achieve here are very much the same. It may be just a stylistic format but the advice that I have is that the proposals set out in the Government amendment are best practice. It is better to amend rather than to replace the sections to avoid changing subsection numbers. That is the crux of this. My understanding of Senator Higgins's main concern is that we do not provide for the accused or a convicted child to be identified. I agree with her on that. Section 93 addresses that point and that is the reason I have made the amendment subject to section 93. My understanding is that this does apply after proceedings have ended and that there is case law on this on which I would be able to provide her with some more information after today but my understanding is that it does apply afterwards.