Results 2,701-2,720 of 11,861 for speaker:Brian Hayes
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: The courts have the sole right of interpretation but it is our job to frame law around existing provisions within the Constitution.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: I move amendment No. 14: In page 7, subsection (1), lines 28 to 40, to delete all words from and including "set out-" in line 28 down to and including "relates." in line 40 and substitute "in the authentic version of an Act.". Do the same arguments apply to amendment No.14 as to amendment No. 13, and will the reply be the same?
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Senator Ryan has raised an important issue. Frequently the Committee and Report Stages debates tease out and reflect many provisions, which will be enacted. When they are ultimately interpreted in a court case and an attempt is made by the Judiciary to fully interpret what the Houses meant when an Act was passed, either side of the argument in the case can use passages from the debates in...
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Will the Minister of State explain why legislation passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas is not on the website the next day? Our first amendment sought to bring some efficiency to the operation of Government whereby legislation enacted would be on the website the next day. I accept however, that amendment No. 26 is ruled out of order on the basis that it would be a charge on the Exchequer....
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: How long does it take, on average, for an Act when passed to become available on a CD-ROM or whatever? If we do our business and pass legislation we have a responsibility to get it up and running as soon as possible, particularly for people who regularly use that information in an electronic format. If better regulation means anything it means that we improve our performance on this issue and...
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: The problem is greater in regard to statutory instruments than in regard to Acts. Practitioners in this area who try to get general applications before going into court to argue a case say it is virtually impossible to access the statutory instruments expeditiously on a website soon after the Minister has signed them into law. Instead, they must go to the Government Publications Office and...
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: I move amendment No. 29: In page 9, line 3, after "Act" to insert "in electronic or printed form". This section states,"An Act is a public document and shall be judicially noticed". In this amendment we suggest that judicial notice be taken of Acts in electronic as well as printed format, which is not the case now. The current situation is a paper trail. If the court notices an Act it is as a...
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: I understand from Article 25 that the President signs the legislation in English and Irish and it is then enrolled in the Supreme Court office. Is the Minister of State saying that for this to become applicable, we must change the Constitution?
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Many of the amendments the Minister of State is favouring are derived from recommendations of the Law Reform Commission. Has the commission been asked to examine the issue?
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Hear, hear.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Am I correct in saying that printouts from CD versions of Acts are not admissible in courts, that it must be the actual physical text of an Act?
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: That is crazy.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: The reason the Minister of State will not accept the amendment is not constitutional but because the amendment is not appropriate to this legislation. It is appropriate to another Act.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: We could make this amendment if it were not constitutionally unsound.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Why not fix the problems regarding the CD formats?
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: I move amendment No. 32: In page 9, subsection (1), line 28, to delete "on" and substitute "following". I have been reliably informed of an important principle in law, which states that ignorance of the law is no defence. One cannot use in court the fact that one has no knowledge of the law as a defence against a charge. I will read the current drafting of section 15(1) for the attention of...
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: Yes. However, I have highlighted this drafting point in order to ensure that fairness prevails as to the date at which legislation becomes applicable. I am interested to hear the Minister of State's response on this matter.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: It is crystal clear.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: If I interpret the reply correctly, it means that re-enactment will be decided on a case-by-case basis. Is that what is being said? If that is the case, it would presumably clog up a lot of parliamentary time because it could not be done by means of statutory instrument.
- Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)
Brian Hayes: It is done by order.