Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

It is indicative that land registration is complex, reflecting the various changes in our history. In my constituency until recently land registry legislation and the bulk of the deeds that still form the day to day practice of conveyancing describe lands as being situate in the heart of County King's if it is on the Offaly side or in the heart of County Queen's if on the Laois side. Approximately two years ago the Land Registry, by way of practice direction, decided not to issue any new deeds or folios in the former royal names of the counties. Nevertheless, many bank vaults and safes throughout the constituency still hold original deeds with Queen's County and King's County, even though numerous transactions may have taken place up to the mid-1990s.

The Registration of Title Act, to which the Minister referred, dealt with compulsory registration. From early 1970 Counties Laois, Carlow and Meath were counties where, if Land Registry land was the subject matter of a conveyance, registration in the Land Registry was compulsory. I do not know why this was never extended in the manner in which I am sure was intended in the Registration of Title Act. Had compulsory registration been extended from 1970 onwards, the Minister's task in introducing electronic conveyancing would have been far simpler because with the various transactions and changes in ownership over that time significant easing of the system might have taken place. However, it was not. It is really only in the compulsory registration counties that the registration of title is incorporated in the issue of a single land certificate and this has made significant changes and has very much eased the burdensome nature of conveyancing by having just title incorporated in the Land Registry.

A reading of the Second Schedule to the Bill, which lists the repealed statutes, shows us just how archaic the law in Ireland in this area has been. When we have to abolish statutes that were previously in effect since the time of Edward I, we know that it is long overdue. The Statute De Donis Conditionalibus is finally leaving us for good. The Statute Quia Emptores 1290, and the Illusory Appointments Act 1830 will go, in the same way, into the bin of history. It never ceases to amaze me that we continue to rely on archaic laws and statutes that not only predate the State, but date back to the 12th and even the 11th centuries. The sooner we, as legislators, deal with that, the better for clarity and expediency.

I pay particular tribute to the Law Reform Commission for all the work it has carried out on this issue. I have immense regard for the commission as it is a body from which I believe many of our State agencies and State-sponsored bodies could learn a valuable lesson. Under the Honourable Mrs. Justice Catherine McGuinness of the Supreme Court, as President of the commission, and her only full-time colleague, Ms Patricia T. Rickard-Clarke, the Law Reform Commission has successfully implemented a programme of research and investigation into the law that is second to none. Its rate of delivery of sound, considered and detailed reports on areas of important law reform is admirable. Equally, it is infinitely valuable to us as Members of the Oireachtas. It is important that we place on the record our thanks to it for its great work.

The objective of legislators and conveyancers is similar notwithstanding the technical and complex nature of the conveyancing practice. It is to make the process simpler and more straightforward that it might be clearly understood by the consumer. To achieve this goal much of the archaic terminology must be replaced by concepts that are more easily understood. Making the process more consumer friendly will also incorporate the most welcome feature of cutting costs and delivering a better service for better value.

I pay tribute to the staff of the Land Registry. I am pleased to see examiners of title consulted in the process. Some of what passes across the desks of examiners of title is extremely complex and difficult. It conjures images of examiners of title with wet towels around the backs of their necks and the door locked to the outside world as they go through the various statutes dating back to the 13th century.

The explanatory memorandum must be one of the most complex and detailed this House has ever seen. I am not sure to what extent the House will debate this archaic treatise. I am not sure whether I have the stomach for it. Thank God for Professor Wylie and friends who are guiding us in this legislation and upon whose advice, expertise and guidance we are very much reliant.

See this speech in context