Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am not suggesting that vehicles need to be taken in full flight. If we start to go down a slippery slope, however, where will we stop? What will we not enter a dwelling or its curtilage to take? There are many things that would be much easier if gardaí had access to people's homes or homes' curtilage without a warrant but there is a reason there are caveats and protections in this regard.

Following a general principle that I believe to be reasonable, more permission is usually granted in law for investigation and prosecution. We will come to this when talking about cameras. It is one thing to do something for prosecution or investigation but another to do it on the basis of speculation about events that have not occurred.

This amendment is quite blunt in respect of removal. I will signal on Report Stage that a key point of concern is not just the reference to having been or being used but the phrase "likely to be driven". It is fine when following somebody in a vehicle that one can identify as having been used in a certain way but the wording "likely to be driven or used" is really blurring the line. This is because, when speculating on what is likely to be used, one is neither prosecuting nor investigating an offence committed; rather, one is in a zone of speculative or preventive action. In that context, the Minister is just blurring the line establishing what comprises an intrusion on rights. One would need to have a reasonable evidence base suggesting a vehicle will be used. I accept our amendment requires a flat deletion but I believe, with respect, that some nuancing of the legislation is needed, including on the question of garages directly attached to a house.