We hear you. Thank you, Senator.

With regard to judicial issues, I am conscious that there is a separation of powers between the Executive and Judiciary. I am going to read what I have to say, and I will do so in the two minutes allowed. An issue arises over the judicial council Bill and there is much concern over it. The Government remains completely unaware of when this Bill will actually be published. The first motion I tabled in this House was on the establishment of a judicial council. In fairness to the Minister, she gave a very comprehensive response and said it would be published. Speaking in the House on 12 October, the Minister said the Bill would be published. The Taoiseach told the Dáil on 26 October that the heads of a Bill would be published in November. The Minister, however, said just a few days ago in the Dáil that she hopes the Government will be in a position to publish the legislation before the end of the year. We read in The Irish Times this week that the publication of the Bill is likely to be delayed until next year. I am not a lawyer but I am familiar with the well-known maxim, "Justice delayed is justice denied." What is holding up this judicial council? We hear on a daily basis a plethora of arguments, both inside and outside the House, on the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, and the appointment of judges. This is clearly a problem for the Government. It requires the Taoiseach to take action and a certain amount of discipline and control. The Government is required to clarify the position on the vacancies that currently exist. There are people queueing up in the criminal courts and there is a lack of judges. The issue is critical and it needs to be addressed. Is there a row going on? Clearly, there is. Does it need to be clarified? Yes, it does. Who should clarify it? In the first instance, the Minister for Justice and Equality should come back here and tell us whether the date for the Bill has been changed. It is my intention to issue a further and very detailed statement about this issue today.

I agree with Senator Freeman on the issue of mental health. I would be very happy to have a debate on it in this House. It was only last week that it was requested, in fairness. I am sure the Minister of State's diary has to be checked but I am sure, for the reasons outlined by my colleague, Senator Reilly, she will not have any difficulty coming to the House to explain the position. I agree with the Senator that this must be discussed urgently.

I wish to raise the issue of vaping. I am no fan of smoking, nor am I a fan of vaping, besides the fact that I believe it looks a bit ridiculous. I believed it could be a gateway to smoking for some younger people. I have misgivings about the content of the products. We are really just starting to discover what is in vaping products. The Public Health England review found that vaping is approximately 95% safer than smoking, based on the best information available to date. According to Vape Business Ireland, 99% of those who vape are ex-smokers. Among those who have successfully quit smoking, 32% used vaping products. This is a good indicator of how useful it can be. Therefore, it is fair to conclude, contrary to the notion that vaping is a gateway to smoking, which I believed, that it is in reality proving to be a successful aid to smokers. I raise this because the Government needs to clarify its position on vaping. If vaping is continually placed in the same category as cigarette smoking and regulated as such, its benefits will not be realised. It is imperative that we do everything we can to tackle smoking. We have been very successful to date. Clearly, however, placing vaping products in the same group as cigarettes is not helpful. While it is not ideal to have people vaping, it represents a much better option. I would be grateful for clarification from the Minister on the Department's position on it.