Shane Cassells (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

That is exactly what we are trying to do because that is exactly what is happening elsewhere in the Bill. The Minister is herself cherry-picking. She is picking oranges over there, and just because Senator Malcolm Byrne and I are in here picking apples, it does not seem to suit her.

We had a discussion here last week in which we pointed out that reference was made in the Bill that it should have regard to Government policy on environmental issues, and rightly so. Yet, we tabled an amendment to the Bill to have regard to Government policy on addiction issues, particularly with regard to gambling. This would dovetail with the gambling Bill, which we will table later this year. We asked for regard to be given to the establishment of the gambling commissioner’s office, but it did not seem to suit. Therefore, yes, we are trying to mandate it. I say this because the individualisation of other aspects of Government policy is being mentioned in this Bill.

Much like I said last week, the reflection process that keeps getting referenced in all of the answers during our debate had better be a very deep and meaningful one. I mean that. I was pretty peeved here last week about the response, in particular on the gambling issue. This is a very soft amendment. It is not a hardball amendment. It is a soft amendment. It has regard to the lengthy discussions that took place on Committee Stage. I would hope that the Minister and the Government would have respect for the work that was undertaken for over a year on Committee Stage. It engaged in particular with young people, who wanted to have their voices represented and reflected. I get annoyed when we are being told in the written response that we are trying to mandate something that is clearly happening in other aspects of the Bill. I will not go to war with the Government Chief Whip. I respect the answer that has been given. However, we will be returning to this very fulsomely.