Regarding the admissibility of reports, there are occasionally interim reports or some information is given on an interim basis. Do these carry the same weight as a completed report or do the provisions deal only with the final report?
SECTION 67.
Question proposed: "That section 67 stand part of the Bill."
The interim report would be a signal of the seriousness of a situation. As the Deputy is aware, an interim report can apply in two cases; first, where the person doing the report decides to make an interim report and, second where the court requests someone to provide an interim report. In relation to whether it will carry any sanction or the same weight as a final report, obviously it will not. It is simply a case of bringing the powers that be up to speed on where the investigation stands.
There could be a difference. There may not be an interim report, but information could be supplied in the interim which could lead to the conclusion that there is a need to continue an investigation. However, when the final position is established, it could be somewhat different from what might have been found or even thought in the interim. Regarding the admissibility of a report as evidence in proceedings, will only the final report, and not supposition which would arise during the investigation, actually matter? Is my point clear?
The Deputy is making himself absolutely clear. The Deputy is saying that one could be judgmental on the basis of a limited investigation carried out and which could be the subject of an interim report. In the course of further investigation, it could emerge that what was suspected at the stage of the presentation of the interim report did not transpire.
I understand the purpose of interim reports is to simply bring people up to speed on where an investigation stands and whether further investigations might be required. The general idea is that an inspector will only make an iterim report if he thinks it will be useful, for example, if he has unearthed something of which the court should be notified at that stage.
In relation to evidence, paragraph (a) states: "of the facts set out therein without further proof unless the contrary is shown,". In other words, somebody would have the right to challenge the contents of an interim report if they suspected that they were being maligned in any way.
That is the point I am trying to make. These can be grey areas and somebody could look at it in a subjective manner. In the final analysis, surely the weight would attach to the final report and that could be used as the basis from which to proceed.
It would generally be acknowledged that the inspector, in the course of his decision to make an interim report, would only do so if he felt that he had something which required to be reported——
I accept that.
——if there was fairly concrete evidence that something was amiss.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 68 agreed to.