Results 4,181-4,200 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: This is a guillotine. There is one this afternoon.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Great.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: The Leader will see me at 4.45 a.m. if he likes.

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Name and shame.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I disagree vehemently with the disgraceful way in which this Bill is being rushed and I would like an explanation from the Minister why it is being reintroduced on Committee Stage rather than Second Stage. Thirty-five out of 60 Members in this House have had no opportunity to speak on it, including some very eminent legal people such as Senator Regan, a senior counsel. They have been...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: It published a report which urged the creation of a new tort of privacy.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: We should be on Second Stage.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: The Senator's own Members are acting as if we were on Second Stage.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Let us have Second Stage. Let us have a vote.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: Is it possible to put a motion before the House that Second Stage be taken now?

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: It is clear that this side of the House wants a Second Stage debate but the Government has deprived us of the opportunity.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: The rules are being flouted. They may not have been flouted by Senator Regan but they are being flouted all over the place by Fianna Fáil.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I wish to respond to some points made by the Minister. He stated that the Seanad was continuous under the Constitution and this is quite true but it is not continuous in terms of its membership. I wish that was the case. Why did I fight the last election if it is so continuous?

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: If it is continuous why are there more people on the Government side who want to have a Second Stage debate? I reiterate what Senator Regan said. Has the Minister read the Seanad debate in full? There were various points at which his predecessor, the then Minister, Mr. McDowell, indicated that he intended to make changes or was thinking of making changes but none of those have been made....

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: It is as relevant as anything that was said over there.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: On that point, it is clear there is disagreement on this side of the House; it is also clear that there are Ministers who disagree with a great deal in the Bill and would have welcomed it being reintroduced on Second Stage. I believe the Minister knows this. Many of his colleagues do not want the Bill in this form but it is being rammed through. I have asked the question why and I have...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: The Leader of the House said it would be the reasonable and sensible thing to introduce it on Second Stage; either that or he is talking nonsense. It was force majeure.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I did not agree with him.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: It is the reason we have to be elected.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2007)

David Norris: I wish to raise a point of order. I ask for a ruling from the Chair as to whether Senator O'Toole is correct in this as the Minister is on the record of the House as having said that he was offered the option. If this is not the case, who offered him the option?