Results 381-400 of 11,433 for speaker:Michael Kitt

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: These are technical amendments to shorten and simplify the section, which was inserted on Committee Stage in the Dáil.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment to shorten and simplify the section, which was inserted on Committee Stage in the Dáil.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment to clarify the subsection by repeating the words.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a question of resources. I am advised that it would be impractical. The requirements placed on the State through the Office of the Attorney General would impose a significant financial compliance requirement and a charge upon the people. In addition, copywriting the Acts is based in the Houses of the Oireachtas, not the Office of the Attorney General. The requirement to have...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I am told that it is up on the Oireachtas website relatively quickly but it takes time for the Office of the Attorney General to put it up. I can inquire about the precise time for the Senator. It is an issue of resources which I know from dealing with the officials in that office, is an important one. Hopefully, some of the updating legislation we are introducing will improve this process....

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I would be more than happy to raise this issue with the Office of the Attorney General. The information appears first on the Oireachtas website. I will be glad to discuss with my officials whether anything can be done to increase the speed with which the information is processed. We will deal later with the Senator's amendment about the electronic form of a document. Problems surround the...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment so that the reference in line 30 to a provision relates back to line 29 as "such provision", when the example is in a schedule.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: The proposed amendment is connected to amendment No. 30 inserting a new section 14 regarding the electronic version of Acts. The amendment is not accepted. In addition, the proposed amendment misunderstands the nature of section 13. This section merely deals with the consequences of something being an Act, namely, that it shall be "judicially noticed". It does not deal with the physical text...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I will clarify the issue.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I am advised that further work can be done by the Senator on this matter. Perhaps we could all do so. Proof of what the Act states could be pursued under the Documentary Evidence Act 1925. Under section 2, proof of an Act can be given "by the production of such Act or Journal printed under the superintendence or authority of and published by the Stationery Office". We are discussing a...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: A seal was used in medieval times, as the Senator knows, and the signature became the authentication of the seal. This matter is steeped in history. I suggest the Senator examine the Documentary Evidence Act 1925 and I will ask my officials to do likewise.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I am advised that the Senator is correct.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I will confide in Senator Quinn that one of the first questions I asked my officials when I examined this Bill related to the issue of electronic signatures. As the Senator said, the Taoiseach and the former President of the United States of America, Mr. Bill Clinton, were involved in promoting the move towards electronic signatures in a technological age. At this stage, it would be best to...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: Correct.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: In respect of this legislation, my advice is that something is not an authentic document in electronic form. I understand there are disclosures on websites in other jurisdictions. Serious issues surround this matter as there can be certain errors when moving towards an electronic mode of conduct.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: We are opposing this amendment because we want certainty but I suggest to the Senator that there are other ways we can examine the matter. We will be glad to share any information that emerges through our own investigations in this area.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment. Textually, "session" must be a reference to a parliamentary session. For the sake of greater clarity, it is felt appropriate to expressly refer to parliamentary session.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: I am told we gave an assurance to the Bills Office that we would include this provision.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: If accepted, this amendment would result in different rules applying for those Acts passed before and after the enactment of this Bill. In addition, difficulties would arise where a Bill, once passed, could not become operative until the commencement of the following day. This would be particularly problematic in terms of emergency legislation. The only theoretical difficulty with commencing...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment to improve clarity.