I call Deputy Coppinger.

I want to send my sympathy and solidarity to the man who was brutally attacked in Belfast, and to all affected by the subsequent racist violence. I am going to refer to it in my Questions on Policy or Legislation.

I will raise with the Taoiseach again the issue of gender-based violence, which he and the Government acknowledge is an epidemic. It is largely unreported. One of the key reasons is the hostile, traumatising and misogynistic legal system that so many complainants face. Survivors' counselling notes being used in trials has been an issue raised on the floor of this Dáil and campaigned on for over a year now by survivors and by the Rape Crisis Centre.

The handling of this issue by the Government is shocking and disgraceful. It is shoehorning that issue into 12 or 13 others. It is squeezing it with so many issues into a new Bill, which will finish tonight at 9.15 p.m. or so. We will gather here and survivors will be in that Gallery because they want to come and see this through to the end. They will see it squeezed and, potentially, amendments will not be reached for debate. These are amendments that were sought by survivors and by the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, whose representatives the Minister refused to even meet to discuss their proposals for dealing with this. I think the Minister let the cat out of the bag on Committee Stage when he asked a Sinn Féin Deputy and me what if an individual he was counselling provided information to him in that counselling session and, subsequently, a criminal trial took place and he had a record of what was said to him that completely undermined what was said in the prosecution - in other words, women lie and counselling notes can potentially be used as evidence to try to catch them out. He said that he cannot ban the counselling notes. What the Minister has always said, and the Taoiseach has said, is that it is unconstitutional but the Taoiseach had a chance even within the Constitution to make really strong privilege. Very quickly, in the 45 seconds, he has done nothing to limit or regulate the Garda or Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, seeking the notes. The rape crisis centre had asked for a court order at that stage. It does not improve the standard for disclosure. The Government broke a promise to introduce presumption of non-disclosure explicitly. It does not require the accused to engage with the facts of the case at application stage. It removes survivors' agency to consent or not. It continues the violating practise of raw counselling notes being handed to lawyers and the accused. It does not expressly state that counselling notes are not evidence. There is no legal advice to survivors about the whole process. The complainant is only notified of an application order after the court order pre-trial hearing is given. There is a total ban in Tasmania but I think the Taoiseach could have gone much longer. Survivors are extremely disappointed.

At the outset, the Deputy made an assertion in respect of the Minister. She kind of made a few leaps and sort of said that the Minister is saying that women lie in court cases. That is outrageous and should be withdrawn. There is no room for that in debates of this kind. We are all coming to this issue in a bona fide way. That is the first point I would make. There is no agenda here. We agree that violence against women and domestic violence, in particular, is at an appalling level. There are multiple factors responsible for that and legislation can help. The reforms the previous Government and this one have introduced, particularly the establishment of Cuan, the expansion of refuge places, which needs to happen faster and at a more accelerated pace if we can get the infrastructure delivered, and a range of other measures are testament to that. There are also cultural issues and issues to deal with the increased prevalence of violent pornography online and so forth, which we really have to deal with and which is a factor in the level of violence against women and the misogyny we are experiencing in our societies.

The Minister has sought within the constitutional framework and within constitutional parameters to deal with the issue of disclosure. The Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill endeavours to do that to ensure, in the first instance, that judicial oversight governs the disclosure of any counselling records so that the rights of victims to privacy are always taken into account. On 19 May, the Minister brought forward further amendments to the legislation to further restrict the disclosure of counselling records. In this context, the presumption of non-disclosure was introduced in relation to these records. A presumption of non-disclosure ensures the legal status of these records is that they are not to be released except in certain circumstances. The current protection regime will also be extended to the following personal records: medical records, child protection records and social work records. Those records often contain highly personal information and are currently routinely disclosed. These reforms will ensure that any disclosure of sensitive material only occurs where necessary and always subject to strict judicial scrutiny.

It is a significant strengthening of the law over what we have. It restores the original intent of the original legislation and it is a better balance between competing rights. Of course, the constitutional rights are significant in terms of the accused's rights to a fair trial. The Minister is not just saying this for the sake of saying it. There are significant constitutional issues that have to be navigated in the drafting of this legislation. This is a significant improvement on where we are and it should be acknowledged as such.

I think the Minister's remarks could certainly be interpreted that way. They show a complete lack of understanding about the impact of this issue and also about how therapy works wherein people can often blame themselves; they can take on guilt or they could say that maybe it was their fault and all sorts of things. I am not going to go into all the details again. I am just going to state what is in the law. Within the Constitution, there are other rights. There is the right to privacy, a right to dignity and a right to healthcare. I believe there are contending rights there. I am not saying it is easy but I think it could have been addressed. There are human rights as well. Even within the limit if the law, however, Dublin Rape Crisis Centre did contribute a detailed submission. Senior counsel, who the Minister knows, drafted it. There is not a presumption of non-disclosure stated in the Bill. That is the reality. It could have been stated. The rape crisis centre put forward the idea of a narrative rather than raw counsel notes being handed over. The Canadian system seems to be what the Minister is repeating, which has not reduced requests for access to the notes.

I appreciate the Deputy has acknowledged that it is not easy and that there are difficulties in terms of framing legislation within constitutional parameters here. That is at the core of this. I would have much empathy with the broad argument in terms of the disclosure of counselling notes. However, this legislation represents a very significant improvement and strengthening of the legislation on behalf of women, in particular, as opposed to what we had. There had been a request for additional time. My understanding is that was facilitated by the Chief Whip, and there will be two hours and 30 minutes in total this evening for the conclusion of the legislation.