Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

My amendment, No. 55, relates to the fact that, at the moment, the section requiring the relevant body to provide information on application by a relevant person aged 18 years or over, only provides for early life information, care information and incorrect birth registration information. As we discussed with regard to the definitions, medical information is categorised separately.

The Minister might recall I had an amendment where I tried to insert medical information into the definition of "care information" but it was regarded as separate. I am concerned that, as medical information is defined separately and is not encompassed within early life or care information definitions, it is not included in the areas where information can be applied for from a relevant body. It might just be an inconsistency so I ask the Minister to address that. Amendment No. 55 is quite simple in that it would insert "medical information" in the list of areas covered.

Amendments Nos. 62 to 67, inclusive, are about the same issue we addressed previously, that is, the "mays" and "shalls". The idea that these bodies may not be able to do something was mentioned but the word "may" is very wide. It simply means that someone might do something. There is not even a caveat. It could say "shall, so far as would be practicable", although I do not like that phrase. That way, if they were not in a position to provide that statement, in those circumstances that were outlined, that would cover it. Phrasing it as "may", leaves open the possibility of "may not". That is the concern.

The Minister has inserted time clauses elsewhere in the legislation so amendment No. 64 is another attempt to copper-fasten expedience in the provision of information. The way it is framed at the moment, information will be provided only where it relates to the application and where the body is satisfied with regard to the guidelines. With that framing, there could be a process where the body needs to satisfy itself of these things. It has a presumption of it being difficult. It frames it as going through these hoops before giving the information. These could end up being lengthy processes which constitute a bottleneck or delay for people accessing their rights.

I will let the Minister reply while I check my notes on amendment No. 65. This is Senator Ruane's amendment and I am speaking on her behalf so I just want to make sure I am faithful to her note on it.