Results 5,341-5,360 of 16,537 for speaker:Brian Lenihan Jnr

Written Answers — Deportation Orders: Deportation Orders (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: As the Deputy is by now aware, the information requested will require a cross-referencing operation which will match the data held by my Department with those records held by the Irish Prison Service. I wish to advise the Deputy that the information sought is, at present, being compiled and he may rest assured that this information will be conveyed to him at the earliest possible date.

Written Answers — Visa Applications: Visa Applications (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the person in question made a Family Reunification application in June 2007. The application was forwarded to the Refugee Applications Commissioner for investigation as required under Section 18 of the Refugee Act 1996. This investigation is completed and the Commissioner has forwarded a report to my Department. This...

Written Answers — Departmental Expenditure: Departmental Expenditure (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: Costs of the type referred to by the Deputy are generally only incurred by my Department in the context of major building projects, which are in the main managed and overseen by the Office of Public Works. The only identifiable costs in the period in question were incurred in County Dublin in 2007 by the Irish Prison Service in the amount of €228,338. Any costs incurred by the Courts...

Written Answers — Asylum Applications: Asylum Applications (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: The person concerned arrived in the State on 24 February 2005, on a C-Visit Visa, valid to 15 March 2005. He applied for asylum on 9 March 2005. His application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. The person concerned then lodged Judicial Review Proceedings in the High Court...

Written Answers — Asylum Applications: Asylum Applications (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications. As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status...

Written Answers — Liquor Licensing Laws: Liquor Licensing Laws (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: I propose to take Questions Nos. 489, 490 and 492 together. As the Deputy is no doubt aware, I intend to bring forward proposals in the next session for legislative reforms in relation to the public order aspects of the sale and consumption of alcohol which I hope will, with the assistance of both Houses, be enacted and implemented before the summer recess. I have asked the Government Alcohol...

Written Answers — Proposed Legislation: Proposed Legislation (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: I refer the Deputy to my reply to Question No. 94 of 4 March, 2008. I have nothing further to add to the details of that reply.

Written Answers — Residency Permits: Residency Permits (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the person in question made a Family Reunification application in June 2006. The application was forwarded to the Refugee Applications Commissioner for investigation as required under Section 18 of the Refugee Act 1996. This investigation is completed and the Commissioner has forwarded a report to my Department. This...

Written Answers — Fraud Offences: Fraud Offences (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: The Larceny Act 1916, and the Larceny Act 1990 were repealed in full by the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001. The offence consisting of fraudulent conversion formerly contained in the 1916 Act was replaced in Part 2 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001, by the offence of theft and related offences. Part 2 of the Act of 2001, section 2, provides...

Written Answers — Departmental Staff: Departmental Staff (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: There are many sources of stress, both professional and personal, that impact on the individual in the modern workplace. Work-related stress is an issue that my Department is taking very seriously. In the period 2005 -2007, the Department ran a number of one-day courses and seminars on stress management, attended by almost 230 staff. My Department has also put in place protocols aimed at...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: The position has not changed. I am glad the Senator has given me an opportunity to put the position on the record of the House. During the Committee Stage discussion on section 3(2), Senator Regan sought clarification on the last part of that provision, which appears to provide for retrospection. I agreed to re-examine the wording of the section. The amendment before the House proposes to...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: The advice of the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel was sought. I was advised that this is a standard drafting provision and that no change is required to the text. The purpose of section 3(1) is to ensure that when this legislation is enacted, it will not have retrospective effect. Clearly, it has to speak from the time of its commencement....

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: This amendment proposes the deletion of section 7(13), the purpose of which is specifically to disallow the application of the section in the context of declaratory order provisions. In other words, one will not need a verifying affidavit in such cases. The reason for this measure is that it is clear that applications for declaratory orders are not the same as normal defamation actions —...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: It will be required under the section of the Bill relating to declaratory orders.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: The advice available from the Attorney General's office and the parliamentary counsel is that the provision, as drafted, is clear in providing that a person has a single cause of action in relation to multiple publications subject to subsection (2) where the court may grant leave to a person to bring more than one defamation action in respect of a multiple publication where it considers that...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: Senator Regan has not framed an amendment——

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: ——which would address the matter he raised, namely, the requirement of proof of special damage in the event of a corporate plaintiff. There was some debate on this section on Committee Stage and I undertook to have another look at it. The Attorney General indicates that recent case law in the United Kingdom has made it clear there is nothing wrong in legal principle in having a cause of...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: These are Government amendments arising out of the debate on Committee Stage. Section 15 provides for absolute privilege for witnesses appearing before Oireachtas committees. On Committee Stage Senators raised some concerns as to the drafting of the provision. Following advice received from the Office of the Attorney General I propose to amend subsection (2) to make it subject to section...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: Many of the Senators who spoke on Committee Stage agreed that absolute privilege should attach to statements made by the Judiciary in court and that is essential for the effective operation of the judicial arm of State. In Senator Regan's amendment the additional words are not necessary to qualify the performance of a judicial function but cast doubt on it and open an undesirable vista....

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Brian Lenihan Jnr: I agree with Senator Alex White on this section. There was always a defence in our law of fair and reasonable comment on a matter of public importance. All that this section is doing is restating that well-established defence in a more elegant way in terms of honest opinion, which always comprised the gist of that defence. That is the purpose of the section. I was concerned when I heard...