From what I can gather, there is a significant lack of accountability to the House on this issue. This is coming in under the radar without debate, for example, on the inadequacies of the 2012 Act, the unintended consequences, as the Taoiseach described them, which, again, precluded the Ombudsman for Children from hearing complaints regarding children in detention. I cannot understand why there would not be a debate on this motion, a presentation by the Minister, a statement outlining why the House is being asked to approve this resolution, the background, implications and consequences of it. It is sharp practice to lay this motion before the House almost in silence without any accompanying statement to the House in plenary session.
Until I stood up and asked for the information, the many Members present would not have been very aware of what was being slipped through. I can understand why and may have no opposition to it, although I would like to check the legal underpinning. Trying to apply this power via the agency route may not be as legally robust as doing so by primary legislation, which was the original intention. Somewhere along the line the Taoiseach got it wrong in terms of the original legislation and its unintended consequences. I do not know the background to this or why it happened, but we need far more transparency in the House. There should be no reason someone did not today issue a statement to facilitate a debate because many issues arise from the Ombudsman for Children's reports, particularly on children in detention, which have proved contentious during the years and which merit debate. It is wrong that did not occur.