John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)

I move amendment No. 92:

In page 61, to delete lines 6 to 15 and substitute the following:

"(4) Where, before the receipt of a notification under subsection (3), a collection permit has been granted to a person authorising him to hold a collection in the same locality or place and on the same date as the locality or place and date to which that notification relates, the Chief Superintendent concerned may, if he considers it necessary or desirable in order to ensure the maintenance of public order or the prevention of annoyance to the public, direct that the proposed non-cash collection shall not take place at that locality or place on that date.".

With regard to amendment No. 92, the wording now proposed to be removed left the chief superintendent of the Garda district with no option other than to refuse to allow another non-cash collection to take place on a date or location where a collection had already been approved. This was considered unreasonable as there might be no practical reason both collections could not have been accommodated.

There is a discretion for the chief superintendent to take public order concerns into account. That was the issue we were discussing. In the context of other amendments, a more flexible approach will emerge.

Amendment No. 93 proposes the deletion of text now proposed to be removed under amendment No. 92, as it is no longer necessary.

See this speech in context