Dáil debates

Tuesday, 1 July 2008

Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2006: From the Seanad

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

It is interesting that there has been no input, according to the Minister of State, from the Law Society. In other words, if it has been operating on the assumption that it has had these powers, implicit or otherwise, over the years, I wonder what its view is about the fact that we are now giving formal expression to them in this new law. Perhaps it is six of one and half a dozen of the other that it is in this Act, but it does not ring true with me that this was an afterthought as the Bill progressed through the Seanad. Something must have sparked it. Something must have caused it to emerge now, otherwise it would have been in the original Bill. Whether it is allocated to the Legal Services Ombudsman Bill or this one may be a matter of no great import.

I can only take the Minister of State at his word that he has professional advice that the retrospective element is perfectly consistent here. It just occurred to me that there must be some reason for taking care to ensure provision for such retrospection.

Deputy D'Arcy seemed to have a reasonable point on apprentices. I did not know that type of responsibility could attach to an apprentice. I would have thought that if an apprentice was found to be allegedly involved in some kind of misconduct or miscreance, that would be a matter for the partner in the company or the master, rather than the apprentice.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.