Results 6,541-6,560 of 32,610 for speaker:Paschal Donohoe

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I believe there is an amendment from Senator Craughwell on this point and perhaps we can have this debate when we get to that amendment. It is tangentially related to this point so I look forward to a debate with the Senator on it.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: We are bringing in a provision for mandatory appearance. This has not happened before. In subsection (1) it is stated "may by resolution require the chairperson ... to attend". Senators Craughwell and Healy Eames spoke about accountability, but this Bill gives local authority members the ability to require the chairperson to come before them. These powers will in many ways be similar,...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: Will the Senator explain what she means? I did not understand her.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: The mandatory requirement to come before a local authority is as a result of a substantial new power in this Bill. I am trying to seek a balance to ensure that power is discharged appropriately. In the scenario the Senator has raised, local authorities are entitled to decline to exercise the power at a particular time, instead inviting the chairperson or chief executive to come in. All the...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: Absolutely. I will outline a hypothetical situation to illustrate. If something is happening within a port with which the local authority is not happy, the local authority could invite the chairperson and chief executive to come in. The person or persons will come before the local authority but if the authority decides to require them to come in at another time, it has a new power which it...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I thank the Senator for his amendment. I assure him the drafting we have is consistent with what we have with all other harbour legislation, the origin of which is in section 35 of the Harbours Act 1996. I do not want to accept the amendment because I am fearful that if I were to introduce a term that is different from what we have in other legislation, it could create a consequence I...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I am satisfied with the way in which the legislation is drafted. Under local government legislation, it is the elected members who set the policy of the local authority. Therefore, any direction relating to local authority policy would be in respect of a decision of the elected members. The fact that the direction in writing issues from the pen of the local authority chief executive...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I thank the Senator for raising a number of points. Neither transfer forms part of the immediate policy horizon. However, the opportunity is being taken to provide that the legislative basis will be in place should a decision be taken in future. The Bantry Bay Harbour Commissioners were dissolved in 2014 and control of the harbour transferred to the Port of Cork Company. This decision was...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: As the port is in private ownership, having been sold in 2014, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on how it is performing.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: That is correct. As the Bill relates to the large number of ports that are owned by the State, it would not be appropriate to comment on Greenore Port as it is not owned by the State.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: No.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: It is in private ownership.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: No, it is fully privately owned.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I agree with Senator Barrett on the need to have a wide board with honest experience regarding management of harbours. However, the Bill already provides for the kind of skill set the Senator is looking for. The language used in the Bill refers to wide experience and competence in maritime transport services. The role of harbour management is clearly contained within that language. These...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I thank Senator Craughwell for doing that. Reference was made to my patience but it is just me in front of the House, respecting the work done by Senators and justifying what I believe is the right approach to take for the Bill. I look forward to spending some hours with Senator Craughwell continuing this work on Friday, if he feels it to be appropriate. I appreciate where he is coming...

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: I do not believe there is an anomaly at all. The Senator will have to explain it to me again. I wish to make it absolutely clear that this Bill will provide for appropriate separation between the board of directors and local authority members while giving local authority members more say in the oversight of the port company.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: The logic is clear. It is a company.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: No, it is not.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: It is not. The difference is that if it is incorporated as a company, it is a company under company law.

Seanad: Harbours Bill 2015: Committee Stage (16 Dec 2015)

Paschal Donohoe: No. If it is integrated into the local authority, it is no longer a company, there is no board of directors and the local authority members will have their say in the operation of it. We have agreed that.As for the reason, if it is then brought in as a company, there would be directors of the company. Does the Senator agree with me on that point?