Conor Lenihan (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)

The Government amendment to section 6 of the Bill was agreed upon on Committee Stage. The Labour Party's proposed amendment to section 6 would involve its replacement with a differently worded provision which would have substantially the same effect. As I stated on Committee Stage, the main difference in the proposed amendment is that, whereas the Bill deals with the matter by the textual insertion of an additional section to the 1967 Act, the proposed amendment is a stand-alone provision in the 2005 Bill. Our concern is with textual consistency in the arrangement of the Bill. Given that section 6 affects the status of orders made under Part VIII of the principal Act, the Government favoured the decision to insert the additional section textually to the 1967 Act and is acting on the advice of the Parliamentary Counsel on the matter.

On another matter raised by Deputy Higgins, the Supreme Court in its 2004 judgment in the case of Leontjava and Chang v. the DPP held that it is constitutionally permitted to provide by an Act that a statutory instrument already in force shall have statutory effect as if it were an Act of the Oireachtas and, furthermore, that it is not necessary to set out in detail the contents of such orders.

See this speech in context