Results 2,661-2,680 of 11,242 for speaker:Noel Dempsey

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: What is outlined in section 14(4)(b) may be a different way of stating it but it is what the Senator suggests. I do not believe it is unreasonable to expect that people involved in a trade or business should exercise due diligence in their affairs, whether buying, selling or weighing fish. If they can show they exercised due diligence by checking the documentation which they know others...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: This is already covered, the phrase "or not reasonable to ascertain" is included. If someone bought fish without documentation and went to court, he would be caught. If someone bought the fish and asked for the documentation, took copies of it and subsequently discovered the fish were illegally caught and the documents were fraudulent, any reasonable court would accept the steps he had taken....

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: The subsection provides for a formal mechanism for the proper disposal of illegally caught fish, which are obviously perishable. It re-enacts the previous subsection (3) of section 231 of the Fisheries Consolidation Act without the provision for the destruction of fish, which was deleted by Dáil Éireann so as to avoid wasting food. This makes eminent sense and I do not know why anybody...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: I have made my views known on this matter. Senator Kenneally is correct with regard to the power for the navy to fire into fishing vessels. Against my better judgment and to meet the concerns which were expressed, I agreed to the deletion of that section of the Bill. I hope it does not return to haunt those Members who pushed this issue and used it to hold up the Bill. It is now being...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: It would be at the discretion of the commanding officer, who will make a professional judgment as to whether the law is being broken and if by boarding a boat, personnel would be in danger. As the commanding officer makes the judgment, it cannot be laid down in law. It depends on the professionalism of the commanding officer. If he or she feels a danger exists, the personnel must have a right...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: I do not propose to accept this amendment. We have been advised by the Office of the Attorney General that section 19(3) of the Bill is necessary as worded because of the problems which have arisen in court, where the 48 hour detention of a sea-fishing boat expires during a sitting of the District Court. While the matter might be mentioned to the judge, the formal application for an extension...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: The amendment inserts a comma which is deemed unnecessary.

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: What is feared by the Senators does not happen in reality. In most cases, an appeal triggers a hearing in the Circuit Court, and it is clearly necessary to continue the security which applied during the District Court proceedings. This is done through financial bond or detention of the sea-fishing boat concerned. Most of the time, the person concerned can provide a financial bond, which is...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: The principle of ensuring a real deterrent in the law applies here. Section 22(1)(c) of the Bill necessarily refers to the capacity of the sea-fishing boat. That ensures the State will not be left with mere boards, which may not even have scrap value, while the defendant retains a valuable asset which can otherwise be disposed of. In a recent case an owner did not enter into the financial...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: These sections bring our legislation into line with most legislation as revised. The limit of €5,000 is an upper limit on a fine which a court may impose on summary conviction of a person for an offence. I underline the word "may" because it is not compulsory but a matter for the court to decide within that limit. We are simply setting the maximum amount that can be levied. The courts use...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: It states "is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000". The fine can be anything from one cent up to €5,000 and is not mandatory.

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: It is not automatic that a person convicted will be fined the maximum €5,000.

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: Sea-fisheries officers and naval officers may form a judgment and decide to initiate a prosecution if they believe someone is in breach of sea-fisheries law, but they cannot make a decision that a person is automatically guilty and confiscate the gear and catch at that stage. Rather, they will prepare the case for court, where a decision will me made on the confiscation of fishing gear. As...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: We have had a long debate on the amendments before us. I accept the points made by both Senators on relatively minor offences. The sea-fisheries organisations do not accept that we have sought to meet the concerns of those who make genuine mistakes. When the same mistakes are repeatedly made I become sceptical that they are genuine. Some people overfish by a small margin but do so on a...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: The principle of the amendment is dealt with because the judge of the Circuit Court is free to refer a point of law to the High Court. If there is no point of law to refer to the High Court the decision of the Circuit Court judge on a conviction or dismissal of a case is final. While the wording of the section may appear blunt, one has the right to bring a point of law to the attention of the...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Committee Stage. (22 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: The purpose of this amendment was unclear until the Senator spoke. The Senator's point is general rather than confined to this area of the register of fishing boats. I reiterate what I have said on meeting with those in the industry and discussing in detail its future. If there are anomalies, as the Senator refers to them, we can deal with them at the time. The amendment refers to objections...

Written Answers — Broadcasting Legislation: Broadcasting Legislation (23 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: In the context of the development of broadcasting policy my officials and I have cause, on a regular basis, to meet representatives of the various interests that comprise the broadcasting sector, including but not limited to commercial broadcasters, public service broadcasters and independent producers. At many of these meetings the issues to be addressed in the forthcoming broadcasting Bill,...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Report and Final Stages. (23 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: As I explained on Committee Stage yesterday, the amendment is unnecessary because the term "seafishing boat" is separately defined in section 6 and is frequently used in the text. Having double-checked I am assured there is no question that references to "equipment" or "fishing gear" could be held to include a "seafishing boat". The Senator will be aware that the powers available to...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Report and Final Stages. (23 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: I did not quote the section concerned in my response to Senator McHugh when he raised this issue yesterday, although doing so may have been helpful. The proposed amendment would have the unintended effect of providing loopholes to people who want to exploit the law. A case recently brought before the courts and which is currently sub judice concerned an attempt to take advantage of a practice...

Seanad: Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Bill 2005: Report and Final Stages. (23 Mar 2006)

Noel Dempsey: We had a similar discussion yesterday and I explained at that stage that the maximum possible period of two months imprisonment provided for in section 24(1) matches the maximum possible fine of €5,000 which a court can impose for an offence of obstructing a sea fisheries protection officer in carrying out his or her function, as opposed to log book offences. With respect to the point being...