Search the record

Minister to consider that on Committee Stage. I also have a concern about the legal counsellors provision and the provision of legal counsel. "Legal counsellors" is not a term I understand. I understand what it means in plain English, but I do not understand whether it means qualified

help people in family law? Everybody that was at the meeting yesterday wants to do the right thing. I asked earlier about legal group counselling. This was done for children with additional needs. They did group therapy. It was a way of bringing down the list by having … group setting. Will the Minister give me clarification? He has not answered that the couple of times I have asked. Will legal counselling be done in a group setting or an individual setting

stage, supporting more robust and better informed decisions. Just as important, procedural safeguards remain central to the system. High levels of engagement with legal counselling and legal representation demonstrate that applicants are accessing and exercising their rights throughout the process while ensuring that decisions continue to be made

move amendment No. 7: In page 20, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following: “ “legal counselling” means oral or written legal advice from a practising solicitor or barrister, or a person employed by the Legal Aid Board who is authorised to provide legal advice or representation

with vulnerable people who have problems with language not knowing exactly what is going on. They will go through the rabbit hole of legal counselling rather than receiving proper legal advice, which as we all know is defined. We will have a situation where this will have

want to ensure that the legal counselling that is being provided will be very adequate. I believe it will be adequate. It will reflect the definitions that are contained within Deputy Kelly's amendment, as is set out in the administrative procedure regulation. That is the information … legal advice by practitioners being provided. I note the point that Deputy Carthy's amendment allows counselling to be provided by "a person employed by the Legal Aid Board who is authorised to provide legal advice or representation". I want to be more specific in what

Groks of this world? How do we define it? Under the asylum procedure Regulation 2024/1348 providers and counselling can be provided by accredited civil society organisations, specialised legal advisers or government authorities provided they meet national qualification standards. We cannot even get proper accreditation in this country … part of that, how is he going to define the organisations or, dare I say it, the technologies that can actually give such legal counselling

ignored for years. In addition, we are told the organisation's board reviews the child safeguarding policy to ensure it abides by all legal requirements and has written procedures in place. I would like to see the written procedures because this individual rang seven years … others a proper response, and stops stalling and wasting money by using senior counsel and stalling the process in court houses and changing legal counsel to take it on again. It is only costing these people money. I thank the Minister of State for his answer. I will

really useful. Nevertheless, this is a good definition as well. Throughout this debate there has been real concern about the new concept of "legal counselling" that the Bill appears to be introducing. It is not properly defined. At present, particularly under the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995, there

destination for such detention, the level of care provided and by whom, and for how long. Who else would be subjected to this? Legal counselling is not defined in this Bill. This is one of the many concerns held by the Children's Rights Alliance. What legal advice

detention orders, in the Ashdod port. These proceedings were initiated without prior notice to their lawyers and while denying participants access to legal counsel. This constitutes a grave violation of due process and a denial of the participants' fundamental rights. Adalah will continue to seek access and will

reviewed at ministerial level, that a facilitator has been permitted to have sight of them and yet the very families affected and their legal counsel do not have access. We are being asked to sign up to an inquiry process without full transparency. How can any counsel meaningfully

will read the note for the Deputy. It states: "Amendment No. 6 would insert a new definition for legal counselling, a term used later in the Bill, but this definition would provide that such services be provided to persons without charge to the applicant, irrespective of a person

trafficking and stateless persons, need to be addressed. Significant concerns were raised during the pre-legislative scrutiny process regarding what is meant by legal counselling and who will be able to provide it. These need to be addressed. There are also concerns about the ability to meet

rights, the Bill seems more intent on constraining them. My colleague Deputy Ahern spoke the previous day about the issues with the term "legal counselling". We have not had any clarity from the Minister in the interim on what that term means. It remains undefined … will then be left to go through the application process by themselves with little or no guidance. The migration pact makes effective legal assistance a requirement. The Government could and should have used the term "legal advice" but it has actively and deliberately chosen

other areas. We welcome the Ministers' and Government's constructive engagement on this. Of course, another such area is the right to legal counsel and while I will not dwell on it today, I appeal to the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, to engage in mediation in good faith

through. We can discuss important issues that are dealt with in the amendments. For instance, the amendment we are talking about now concerns legal counselling. All three Deputies said that this would end up in the courts. As sure as night follows day, it is going

Given that "legal counselling" is mentioned in amendments to section 26 of the Bill, it would be grossly irresponsible to leave it there undefined. If that is to be the case, could the Minister either define it or commit to removing it from the Bill

ruled out compared to the other one. The Minister is too proud. The Minister started down the road here in relation to "legal counselling", which should be thrown out. When we looked at this, it took up hours. We still do not bloody well know what

case of MA v. Denmark clearly recognised that a two-year waiting period is permissible. I will deal with the issue of legal counsel on Report Stage. It is a complicated issue. We have done our best to reform the system as best we can in the interests

protection and the enactment of the new international protection Bill, obviously there is a requirement within that, that we are going to provide legal counsel to individuals who are seeking assistance in respect of the international protection process. I will have to fund that. That funding will have

detention of children, how we screen adolescents and how we change the nature of access to legal rights to an undefined reference to legal counsel. There is so much wrong with the Bill that we could not in good conscience allow ourselves to be a participant

broken, we should not fix it. I am concerned about this change. Many musicians and performers will see going to court and employing legal counsel to pursue royalties as simply being beyond their means. If securing a few thousand euro requires investing in a solicitor and a barrister

good administration; and — effective legislation must therefore, guarantee: — swift and independent investigation of disclosures; — protection against penalisation and coercive NDAs; — access to legal aid, counselling, and support; — enforceable sanctions for officials who obstruct investigations; and — full compensation for those who suffer detriment through State inaction or abuse … reinstatement, and exemplary damages to whistleblowers who suffer detriment due to refusal or obstruction of investigation; — establish a whistleblower legal aid and support fund to provide representation, counselling, and rehabilitative assistance to whistleblowers and their families; — amend the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, to prohibit the use of NDAs

whistleblowing directive. It has not been done. We need to be fully compliant with the directive. While there is free legal advice and counselling available, the lack of free legal aid is a major flaw. It should be brought in straight away. The cap on compensation for whistleblowers