Michael McNamara (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Part 5 of the Bill relates specifically to developments at Dublin Airport. The explanatory memorandum states:

This Part restates, with minor modifications, the provisions inserted into the Act of 2000 by the Aircraft Noise (Dublin Airport) Regulation Act 2019... There have been some modifications to the provisions of the Act of 2000, primarily where they were deemed necessary to ensure the provisions could be successfully integrated into this Bill.

It goes on, without saying what the modifications or changes are at all.

The problem is that much of this Bill is a restatement of existing law and much of it is entirely new law but what is not clear in the explanatory memorandum is what is a restatement of existing law and what is new law. If the explanatory memorandum does not satisfy that basic function, what is the purpose of it? We could just read the head note on any given section and be as clearly guided as we are by the explanatory memorandum. Why do we have Standing Orders if we are not going to comply with them? It is clearly out of order and on that basis, I do not see how it can proceed, without a vote of the House to suspend Standing Orders. It may be that this is a matter of such urgency as to require the suspension of Standing Orders but it is out of order.

See this speech in context