We will move on to take Leader's Questions under Standing Order 29. Before so doing, I remind Members that during Leader's Questions yesterday, a number of Members sought clarification as to whether it is in order to raise in the House a matter that is currently before a judicial tribunal or commission of investigation. As Members may be aware, Standing Order 59 deals with matters that are sub judice. This is drafted in such as way as to protect the ability of Members to discuss issues of general public importance, even in circumstances where there are proceedings before a judicial tribunal. However, in paragraph 3 it clearly stipulates that "a matter shall not be raised in such an overt manner so that it appears to be an attempt by the Dáil to encroach on the functions of the Courts or a Judicial Tribunal". It also places an onus on Members to avoid, if at all possible, comment which might, in effect, prejudice the outcome of proceedings.

My predecessors have ruled on this issue previously and in certain circumstances have allowed very limited discussions on matters of public importance, which were being examined by judicial tribunals. In applying Standing Order 59, a delicate balance is to be achieved between, on the one hand, a matter of general public importance to be raised, and on the other ensuring that there is no overt encroachment on the work of a judicial body. It is a balancing exercise that must be conducted on a case-by-case basis, which respects the role of parliamentarians to discuss matters of general public importance, the rights of persons appearing before a tribunal to a fair hearing and the ability of a tribunal to complete its work expeditiously and in accordance with due process. As Chair, my role in applying Standing Order 59 is to ensure that the functions of courts and judicial tribunals are fully respected by this House, and I look forward to the continued co-operation of all Members in that regard.

I thank An Ceann Comhairle for that clarification on Standing Orders.

Before I start, on my own behalf and on behalf of Fianna Fáil, I wish to extend deepest sympathies to the family of the late Rory Kiely, the former Cathaoirleach of the Seanad, who passed away this morning. He was a very popular Member of these Houses and a legend in GAA administration. He was chairman of the Limerick county board, and this could be Limerick's year in many ways; the team is doing very well so far. Mr. Kiely was enjoying the hurling this summer. He was also a former chairman of the Munster council. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis. We will have an opportunity at a later stage to give longer tributes.

The Irish public has been genuinely shocked at the CervicalCheck scandal and the treatment of the women at its heart, in terms of non-disclosure in particular, which has resulted in women being forced through the courts. Without the bravery of Vicky Phelan, Emma Mhic Mhathúna and others we may never have known the full extent of what transpired. The drip-drip release of information from the Department of Health, the HSE and CervicalCheck via the Committee of Public Accounts and the Joint Committee on Health compounded that sense of shock and anger. Promises were made, perhaps in haste, in terms of a redress scheme that has not fully been realised, support packages, and mediation which would avoid the necessity of people going to court. We learned this morning that a fourth very ill woman is in court at the moment on this very issue. We were also promised a scoping inquiry that would conclude at the end of June. The progress report produced by Dr. Gabriel Scally will add to that anger and frustration, particularly regarding the manner in which documentation was released by the various bodies, namely, the Department of Health, the HSE and CervicalCheck. More than 4,000 documents were released over two days between 6 June and 8 June and documentation was provided in a format that was essentially unsearchable according to Dr. Scally. He stated it was disappointing and unclear why documents that originally were prepared in electronic format were not available to the inquiry in that format.

Those factors will add to the anger and sense of shock that people feel already about this issue. It should be remembered that the Minister himself was only told about the Vicky Phelan case very late in the day. Indeed, we learned about the substantive and intensive negotiations and discussions between all the bodies for over two years on this issue. There is a discernible pattern in this regard. Dr. Scally is now saying that he will conclude his report by the end of the summer. I have doubts as to whether he will, given the terms of reference and the amount of work he has to do. The Dáil is adjourning on 12 July, which I do not agree with. I believe we should consider whether that is the best course of action. Will the Taoiseach consider cutting to the chase by rolling the Scally inquiry into a commission of investigation?

At the current rate of progress, we are looking at a commission of investigation starting in November if we are lucky. Putting Dr. Scally and his team on a statutory basis in the form of a commission of investigation might be the most effective way to give teeth to the investigation and to ensure there is no more messing, no more withholding of documentation and no more of the kind of stuff that has gone on so far.