Results 3,541-3,560 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: I support what Senator Jim Walsh said. I welcome the Minister of State's enthusiasm for the Law Reform Commission. I hope that enthusiasm will be sustained throughout the rest of this debate, which cannot go on for very long. I will be suggesting some other things that were recommended vigorously by the Law Reform Commission should be taken on board. The points made by Senator Jim Walsh...
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: He received â¬100,000 and did not think it was enough. If he had been granted a declaratory order he would not have been granted anything. The entire country is laughing at him and he has been exposed to ridicule. It does not matter to people whether he is running a brothel. I have no idea if â¬100,000 was too much, too little or exactly right.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: In that case I will send him a few bob in the post. If he nipped this in the bud as provided for in this Bill he would receive nothing. He has been damaged and exposed to ridicule. I read the article, accompanied by a photograph, and laughed like a drain. It cheered up my morning but I do not see why he should not have some recourse. That may have been innocent nonsense but I am using...
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Why? Is that not for the Oireachtas to decide?
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Senator Jim Walsh is correct. Here is a situation where lies have been published and the publication can get away with refusing to withdraw them or apologise. There is much rubbish spoken here about free fees, which is an oxymoron. This Bill establishes free lies and that is not right.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Does this section refer to the situation where the defendant lodges money in court, the plaintiff refuses to accept it, a lower award is made and the plaintiff is penalised for not accepting the earlier offer?
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: I do not like that and I give notice that I might table an amendment on Report Stage. Would that be in order?
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: The plaintiff would lose costs.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Surely one can if the party is right. The other side is already saving because it is getting a small reward. I doubt that the plain people of Ireland have the slightest idea of what is being imposed on them in this Bill. They would be very concerned if they did. There are, by and large, reasonably decent standards in Irish newspapers. However, as Senator Maurice Hayes is aware, this is...
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Is that the one out in Bray?
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: What are they paying for if they have not done anything for which they need to apologise? If that is the case, will they give me a few bob? They are prepared to hand out money apparently for no reason at all but they do not have to apologise or say they were wrong and admit liability. This is something fishy. People like Conrad Black, Sir Anthony O'Reilly and Rupert Murdoch do not hand...
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Find the lady; hunt the thimble.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Hear, hear.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: The Senator got it in one.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: We have heard very little about the Privacy Bill for some time.
- Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: The Senator's amendment was better than the Government's.
- Seanad: Building Control Bill 2005: Second Stage (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: I thank my colleague, Senator O'Toole, for making his time available to me. This is a very important matter. Architecture is a most important and honourable profession. I regret that my university does not have a faculty of architecture, which is a great shame. There is one in the National University of Ireland. I wonder why, even under this Bill, people with architecture degrees are not...
- Seanad: Building Control Bill 2005: Second Stage (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: I would be delighted to come. I accept that Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci were not qualified. There is a need for a so-called grandfather clause of some kind, but I do not see any reason there should not be proper assessment. It seems quite reasonable to me. However, there are a few problems with matters such as certification. I have been supplied with some hypothetical situations...
- Seanad: Building Control Bill 2005: Second Stage (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: Absolutely. Look at Telephone House in Marlborough Street where a row of perfectly fine 18th century domestic dwellings were demolished. The site was sold off to the pension fund of a British trade union and that monstrosity was built and won an architectural award because of the slime running down its wall. It is an appalling monstrosity. They have carried out some titivation on it so it...
- Seanad: Building Control Bill 2005: Second Stage (6 Mar 2007)
David Norris: May I make a final point?