Employment Equality and Institutional Burials (Amendment) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages

I move amendment No. 1: In page 3, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following: "(3) The Institutional Burials Act 2022 and Part 3 may be cited together as the Institutional Burials Acts 2022 and 2026 and shall be construed together as one Act.". Section 1 does not provide a collective construction for the Institutional Burials Act 2022 in Part 3 of this Bill. This matters because section 4 of this Bill does not consist of insertions into or amendments to the 2022 Act. It is a stand-alone provision yet it uses terms from the 2022 Act without defining them. We are raising this because providing a collective citation and construction means that terms such as "director", "eligible family member" and "objection" have the meaning provided for in the 2022 Act.

I thank Deputy Wall for this amendment. While I appreciate the intention behind the amendment, I am not in a position to accept it. The amendments to the 2022 Act contained in section 3 of this Bill are textual amendments to the existing Institutional Burials Act 2022 and, therefore, those amendments are automatically construed with that Act. If the amendments are enacted, they will form part of the 2022 Act, rather than provisions establishing a new stand-alone Act. The transitional provision set out in section 4 will only have temporary application for first cousins who have already made an application to the identification programme currently under way in Tuam. This section does not rely on any term defined in the 2022 Act, except the definition of "Identification Programme", which is also defined in this legislation. Accordingly, the amendment is not necessary.

No.

I move amendment No. 2: In page 6, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following: “(9F) Where the Minister - (a) ceases to publish information or a relevant statement under subsection (9B)(b), (b) ceases to continue to publish relevant information and applicable statements under subsection (9D)(b), or (c) ceases to make available relevant information under subsection (9E)(b), the Minister shall as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter lay a statement before each House of the Oireachtas setting out his or her reasons for so doing.”,”. Under subsection (9E)(b) the Minister can stop publishing certain information with no criteria and with no reason. The amendment simply requires the stated reasons and that notice should be laid before the House.

I thank the Deputy for the amendment. Regrettably, however, I will not be accepting the amendment. The reason being that a report that would be removed from the public side of the portal would be where a person has been directly or indirectly identified by the publication of the report. In such circumstances, it would not be appropriate for me to lay a statement before the Houses of the Oireachtas as this has the potential to bring further attention to the person or to their personal data that this Part of the Bill seeks to protect. While I understand the principle of transparency the Deputy is trying to highlight with this amendment, the unintended consequences would not be in the best interests of the persons whose personal data or identity had been inadvertently published.

No. I am happy with that.

I move amendment No. 3: In page 6, line 21, to delete “information referred to paragraphs (a) and (b)” and substitute “information referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b)”. This is a technical amendment and I just ask the Minister to respond.

I agree to it.

I move amendment No. 4: In page 6, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “Interpretation (Part 3) 3. In this Part, “Act of 2022” means the Institutional Burials Act 2022.”.

I thank the Deputy for bringing forward the amendments. I am happy to accept the amendments, which are technical in nature and improve the drafting clarity of the Bill. As the Bill was restructured into separate Parts and sections during drafting, an interpretation provision that was intended to apply more broadly came to apply only to section 4. These amendments insert a new interpretation provision at the start of Part 3 from the defining Act, the Institutional Burials Act 2022. For the purposes of that Part, these amendments also amend section 4(6) to remove a reference to the definition of the Act of 2022. This will ensure consistency and clarity in the operation of Part 3 and I am happy and to support the amendments.

I move amendment No. 5: In page 7, to delete lines 12 to 14 and substitute the following: “(ii) an appeal was made against that determination and that determination was confirmed on appeal, or (iii) an appeal was made against that determination and was withdrawn before a decision was made.”. Section 4 is a transitional provision dealing with the status of family members of a deceased person who have made applications before the law is changed by this Bill but the section does not cover all scenarios. In particular, section 4(1)(c) deals with cases where a family member has applied and has not either appealed against a refusal or has appealed and lost. It does not cover the case of someone who simply withdrew the appeal knowing that the law as it then stood was against them. The amendment inserts a provision to cover this.

I thank the Deputy for bringing forward the amendment and I am happy to accept the amendment, which is technical in nature and improves the clarity of the Bill . The amendment provides for an additional circumstance that may have occurred in relation to a determination and appeal to be included as part of the transitional arrangements. In this regard, it explicitly ensures that if a first cousin has appealed a determination by the director but withdrew that appeal before the determination was confirmed they could also reapply. This approach reflects the policy intention that first cousins who withdrew an appeal before it was determined should not be precluded from participating in an identification programme. I am happy to support the amendment. I thank the Deputy.

I move amendment No. 6: In page 7, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following: “(3) Where, on the coming into operation of section 3 - (a) an application has been made under section 48 of the Act of 2022 by a person referred to in subsection (1)(a) in respect of which a determination has not been made, or (b) an appeal has been made under section 81 of that Act by such a person in respect of which a decision has not been made, the application or appeal (as the case may be) shall be determined or decided in accordance with the Act of 2022 as amended by section 3.”. This amendment covers another scenario under transitional provisions cases in hand. It clarifies that where an application was made but not determined, or an appeal was made but not decided, then the case should be dealt with under the law as amended.

I thank the Deputy for tabling the amendment. While I appreciate the intent behind it, I am not in a position to accept the amendment. If this legislation is enacted the amended provisions will apply to any applications or appeals, including those that may have been received but have yet to be determined. The amendment is, therefore, not necessary but I thank the Deputy for his consideration of the provisions.

I move amendment No. 7: In page 8, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute the following: “(6) In this section, “Identification Programme” has the same meaning as it has in the Act of 2022.”.