Last week I called on the Minister to honour the commitment he gave to tender openly for the position of independent chair for the review of the abortion legislation and I did so because it had by then emerged, by way of a reply to a parliamentary question, that the Department had not fulfilled the commitment but had contacted a small number of persons inviting them to express interest in the position. Yesterday, I said that it did not augur well that the eventual appointment that was made came on foot of such a closed process. I repeat my call for the Minister to come before this House to explain his and his Department's actions in the matter.

The issue is independence and the perception of independence, and crucial to independence is the issue of perceived impartiality. There was considerable support for me in this House, including I believe from the Leader, when I stressed the importance of independence in the role to be filled by this chairperson. In the past a judge in this country had to recuse herself from an abortion-related case not because she would have shown bias but because there could have been a reasonable perception that impartiality could be wanting because of her previous professional role. Like Caesar’s wife, a person in that situation has to be above any doubt or suspicion. That is why an open process is needed to ensure that the choice made would not just be independent but would be seen to be so.

Let us suppose then that a person had shown prior support for the repeal of the eighth amendment, for example, by retweeting a post in favour of repeal, including the hashtag of the repeal campaign at the time of the referendum.

Let us suppose there was a pattern of tweets showing a preferred view on abortion, maybe disagreeing with the intervention of Pope Francis on the subject, agreeing with former President McAleese's criticism of the Catholic Church on the subject or joining in an online conversation criticising illegal "No" campaign posters on the N11 during the abortion referendum campaign. The point is that the moderate expression of all of those points of view would be legitimate but it would mean that the poster of such tweets would not be the right choice of appointment for the role of independent chair of the review of operation of legislation in such a sensitive area, however decent a person he or she might be. I am afraid there is no supposing in this case. It is my unhappy role to point out that the appointee in this case has engaged in a pattern of social media intervention along the lines I have described. I, therefore, say that she should honourably withdraw from the role to which she has been appointed, that the Government should re-advertise for the role by way of an open tender process and that the Minister should come before the House now to explain his and his Department's role in all that has led to this undesirable situation.

Senator Mullen raised a very interesting point. I am not going to name names on the floor of the House but the appointment of the chair by the Minister, Deputy Stephen Donnelly, is a good appointment. The person is eminently qualified. In fairness to Senator Mullen, there is a need for debate and transparency in all processes. I think what Senator Mullen may be trying to achieve is to have that transparency. I do not agree with him in the context of the appointment of the person, who I think is very qualified. If we were all to have our tweets and Facebook comments judged there would be very few of us left standing with 100% perfection, to be fair.

I am not referring to perfection but perceived independence.

I think what Senator Mullen is saying is that we need a debate on it in the House. That is the importance of what he is asking for.

I ask the Leader to facilitate a debate on transport. The National Investment Framework for Transport in Ireland has been published. All of us received a copy in our pigeon holes today or yesterday. It is the strategic framework for future investment decision making on transport. It underpins the work being done under the national development plan and national planning framework in terms of how our future investment will be guided in the development of our country. Senators Burke and McGahon already made interesting comments about the development of our country this morning. I hope the Leader will facilitate that debate with the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, on the National Investment Framework for Transport in Ireland. It is a matter of urgency.

My other point is in the context of legislation for next week. Senator Craughwell and I are on the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications. We have a very important Bill coming to the House next week. I appeal to the Leader not to guillotine that legislation. It is of absolute importance to our aviation sector. It behoves all of us as Members to thoroughly investigate and interrogate that legislation and to work with the Leader and with Government to make our aviation safer and safe for those who use it while working and travelling.