Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

A number of things have to be said. There is a presumption of constitutionality when a Bill emerges from this House and the onus of proof of its unconstitutionality switches. If a Bill has two possible meanings it is impressed with a constitutional meaning rather than an unconstitutional meaning. However, there is no presumption of constitutionality at all for a Bill that is before us for consideration. Therefore, it is not merely our right but our duty to test whether something that is put before us is consistent with the Constitution. Earlier I noted that Senator Ward was not here when his amendment No. 30 was dealt with, and I am not criticising him for that. Amendment No. 30 states: "in the event that there is a tied vote on any matter before the Commission, the chairperson, including a person acting as chairperson under subsection (3), shall exercise a casting vote". This will mean that in most appointments the Chief Justice will have a casting vote. What I say about the Judiciary effectively being given a power of veto-----