Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)

As I stated in reply to the points made by Deputies O'Keeffe and Rabbitte, it was originally envisaged that legislation would be based on fundamental principles and amendments made either by statutory instrument or orders for secondary legislation. This happens in different jurisdictions in different ways. The case has been well made that we sometimes wander too far away from the primary Act, and that must stop. There is a large amount of secondary legislation and many statutory instruments and orders in different formats and based on different Acts. The change in the system was introduced in the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act a few years ago.

The more legislation that is consolidated the better. When we choose, for whatever reason, to amend primary legislation — or secondary legislation such as statutory instruments — it would be much better to consolidate it every five years using new technology. Consolidation can be extraordinarily difficult when one is dealing with maritime law, for example. I have recently dealt with such cases, but it is a nightmare trying to keep track of all the Acts, not to mention the UN Law of the Sea Conference in Geneva that went on for 30 years. We should try to consolidate our Acts as we proceed.

Deputy Jim O'Keeffe's point was that we could perhaps do so if a committee of the House had a function to clear secondary legislation, such as statutory instruments and ministerial orders, on an ongoing basis. If that committee saw matters that were serious, it could bring them to the attention of Parliament.

In recent years, the House has made good progress on scrutinising legislation but the legislative period is becoming narrower each year due to the increasing volume. The volume of legislation is enormous compared with ten, 15 or 20 years ago. When I was first elected to the House, the budget debate continued for approximately six months and filled up much of the debating time. Now, however, it is difficult for backbenchers to contribute to the budget debate because circumstances have changed so much. It would not be a bad idea, therefore, to have a committee to examine statutory instruments and ministerial orders.

See this speech in context