I move amendment No. 71: In page 46, line 28, to delete “ paragraph (a) or (b) ” and substitute “ paragraph (a) ”.

I move amendment No. 72: In page 46, line 30, to delete “ paragraph (c) ” and substitute “ paragraph (b) ”.

I move amendment No. 73: In page 46, line 37, to delete “this Act comes” and substitute “ Parts 1 to 3 come”.

I move amendment No. 74: In page 47, lines 1 and 2, to delete “the Transfer of Sentenced Persons Act 1995” and substitute “the Act of 1995”.

I move amendment No. 75: In page 47, line 3, to delete “the Transfer of Execution of Sentences Act 2005” and substitute “the Act of 2005”.

I move amendment No. 76: In page 47, lines 7 and 8, to delete “under the Transfer of Sentenced Persons Act 1995 or the Transfer of Execution of Sentences Act 2005” and substitute “under the Act of 1995 or the Act of 2005”.

As the Deputy is aware, the Garda Commissioner is responsible by law for the management and administration of Garda business, which includes the allocation of Garda resources. The Minister for Justice, Deputy Simon Harris, has no direct role in matters of operational policing. The Government is committed to ensuring An Garda Síochána has the resources it needs, with record funding of more that €2.14 billion allocated in the Garda budget in 2023. This includes the provision for the recruitment of up to 1,000 additio…

I again thank Deputy Ó Laoghaire for raising this very important matter. I will certainly convey his concerns to the Minister, Deputy Harris, on whose behalf I also thank the Deputy. The Deputy will be aware that the Government is rolling out a number of policy and legislative initiatives, which will reduce the level of criminal behaviour in our communities. These include introducing legislation to provide body worn cameras for gardaí and community CCTV schemes; rolling out the community safety innovation fund to d…

I am taking this Private Members' Bill on behalf of the Minister for Justice, Deputy Harris, who unfortunately cannot be here. I would like to begin by strongly condemning a small minority of people whose intentions in recent weeks have been to create division and who are engaging in intimidation rather than protest. Over the past year, communities across Ireland have demonstrated great solidarity with those who are coming here seeking refuge. Ireland has a moral and legal responsibility to provide shelter to those…

I thank the Senator for his amendment. Section 46 provides for a consideration of applications and conditions for making of recommendations and under it the commission shall consider applications made in accordance with the judicial selection statement and shall not recommend an applicant to judicial office unless it is satisfied that the applicant is an eligible person; possesses the requisite knowledge, skills and attributes set out in the judicial selection statement and is of sufficient merit; is suitable on gr…

Having somebody apply on multiple occasions and having to be re-interviewed may be cumbersome but it is appropriate. It is fair in any new appointment where new applicants may also be applying for the same job that everybody be treated in a similar fashion. It is not unusual in any job interview process that some people are not called for interviews, for whatever reason. It will be up to the commission to make an assessment on the individual cases.

The answer to the last part is "No". As stated, the Government will not be in a position to appoint anybody who has not been recommended by the commission. Receiving all names will allow the Minister to assess in time the level of applications for a particular area, the range of persons applying, the professions of the applicants and whether it is likely that the diversity goals will be met. It is more for statistical purposes than anything. However, it cannot appoint anybody who has not been recommended.

It is important that the Minister can keep under review the type of applicants who are applying for different positions to see that the different goals are being met in terms of diversity and see the interest in and attractiveness of different positions. It is important for the Minister to have that information. The Government may only appoint someone who has been recommended.

We believe this legislation is constitutional; otherwise we would not have tabled it. I will not repeat the speaking points about why we are gathering this additional information. Regarding eligibility, all Supreme Court justices will be eligible to apply for that vacancy. The independent commission is simply making recommendations and it will not go as far as to say anybody is unsuitable to be Chief Justice. It will simply look at those applicants and decide which of them it believes are best to be recommended to …

That is my understanding, yes.

At the risk of getting into synonyms, I think it just means the outcome of the interview. It is not expanded upon other than that.

The conduct of the interview process is a matter for the commission. As to the results of the interview, an outcome is that there has to be an actual recommendation. While paragraphs (a) and (b) provide for specific particulars, the Government will be making a decision between those who are recommended. Therefore, the result of the interview, its outcome, is that the persons are recommended.

No. The result of the interview is simply that the person is recommended, if that is the outcome. There has to be a statement that they are recommended. That is the outcome if they are recommended.

The Minister must be informed if a person is, in fact, recommended.

Obviously, the commission will decide the results and what that means. While it may be implied that a person being put forward is recommended, I do not think there is any issue with a commission setting out in black and white that the person is, in fact, recommended. In something like this, simply leaving it to implication, it would be open to authoritative criticisms in such circumstances.