-----what it falls under in the 2001 Act. It is the same. It will align with and be applied in the same way as the 2001 Act. Again, I have been assured that there is no need to specify that any particular type of sentence or order can be applied because this is already the case.

We need to engage further on this in terms of the wider picture and the discussion. In order to comply with the equality principle that is underpinned in the High Court ruling, it was made clear to me that children who are aged out and children are treated the same. There cannot be a statutory sentence for children who are aged out because that does not exist specifically for murder for those who are not aged out under the 2001 Act. By default, it falls back to the same approach. The Deputy and I have different vie…

No. We are disapplying it.

Any sentence can be imposed.

It is silent on it.

In relation to murder specifically, it is silent on that.

If we were to accept this amendment, there would be statutory sentencing for murder.

No. It will fall back on the common law.

There is an option there but-----

It is this Act that we are amending, not the 2001 Act.

It will default to the way in which it is defined under the Children Act in relation to murder, which is common law.

There is already.

If this were to apply, then you have a statutory sentencing for the aged-out child, which does not exist currently for the child, specific to this.

Yes.

There is potential for further changes.

This is specific to the case because four or five current cases specific to this issue are potentially impacted. There will be-----

-----possible further change but there are ongoing cases that need to be resolved before this.

My understanding is that there are a small number of cases that this could be applied to but, again, case law suggests that would perhaps not be successful. The advice is despite the fact there are a small number of cases where this has been applied, there is a strong reason to move forward with this specifically. There are a small number of cases. That is not to say a case would not be taken but the very clear advice is that there is case law on this, and that is supported by the ECHR as well.

I do not think we disagree but the very clear advice I have is that by doing this we will still have to come back-----

I have consistently engaged with the Garda Commissioner and colleagues on what more can be done to support An Garda Síochána in its work and efforts to combat and deal with what have become more violent and more challenging protests. No stone should be left unturned. Certainly, while every individual has the democratic right to protest peacefully, there is no reason people should have their faces covered. It obstructs An Garda Síochána in its work. I have engaged extensively with the Garda Commissioner, the Attorne…