Results 981-1,000 of 7,640 for speaker:Rónán Mullen

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I am disappointed with the Minister's response and although I like some of the people involved I am likewise disappointed with the response of the main Opposition party. It seems to be bad public policy to deliberately turn down an amendment that would have the effect of providing that a failure to comply with an order of the District Court would be an offence. As the Minister said on...

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Does the Minister believe that a person who fails to comply with an order of the District Court should not face any sanction by way of being guilty of an offence? Does he consider it acceptable that a person would fail to comply with an order of the District Court?

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: It may become an order of the District Court if the matter is appealed to the District Court. Does the Minister not think that if the District Court upholds the improvement notice the person should face sanction from the law if he or she fails to comply?

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: An issue has arisen that the Minister-----

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I seek further clarification on this point. It is clear from the legislation that two scenarios could arise; I propose that failure to comply with an improvement notice would be an offence. The legislation provides that the person may appeal the improvement notice to the District Court. The implication is that the District Court, as is clearly laid out in the legislation, may affirm or...

Seanad: Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) (9 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Not on that basis.

Seanad: Order of Business. (10 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I listened with great interest to Senator Feeney and I must say I share some of her concerns about the way in which debates take place. It would be great if we could get away from the polarised debate where people are either speaking out against serious problems, for example, that arise in the HSE, without also talking about the good things that are happening. The same onus is on the...

Seanad: Order of Business. (10 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I would welcome an early date for that debate. Around St. Patrick's Day is normally a time of the year when we take a reflective approach.

Seanad: Order of Business. (10 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: An inadvertent breach of the sixth commandment.

Seanad: Order of Business. (10 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Perhaps Senator O'Malley will join us. She is normally very fair-minded.

Seanad: Irish Language: Statements (10 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit agus tacaím go huile agus go hiomlán leis an méid atá ráite ag an Seanadóir Labhrás Ó Murchú, go háirithe lena ndúirt sé maidir le tábhacht Aire sinsireach a bheith ann don Ghaeilge agus gach rud a bhaineann leis agus le tábhacht an róil atá á imirt at an Teachta Éamon Ó Cuív, ach go háirithe. Is siombail é siúd agus is pearsantacht...

Seanad: Order of Business. (11 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I broadly support what Senators O'Toole and Harris said about ministerial responsibility in the Tallaght hospital issue. However, there may be questions to answer in due course as to how this problem evolved. We must look at the failures within the hospital administration. That is the core issue. In passing, I regret the example given by Senator Harris with regard to seeking an abortion...

Seanad: Mental Health: Statements. (23 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. Tréaslaím leis as ucht a chuid dea-oibre. Déanaim comhbhrón leis nach ball den Rialtas anocht é, ach ní fada go dtarlóidh sé sin. When A Vision for Change was published in January 2006 it was greeted with near-universal approval. No one doubted that mental health services badly needed a substantial overhaul and A Vision for Change was seen as...

Seanad: Mental Health: Statements. (23 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Which one is that?

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I have listened to various contributions on the Cabinet reshuffle. I do not see a problem with the multidisciplinary approach that has been taken, with skills being associated with education. As somebody who works in the third level sector, that is appropriate. Asking glib questions such as, "Who is the Minister for jobs?", as we have heard in the media, does not get to the heart of what...

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: It is relevant.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: It is relevant because we must be able to debate the way we talk about politics. My point is that a party has a problem with somebody criticising somebody from their own side but if he said the same about somebody from the other side, there would be no problem.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: I believe Dr. Garret FitzGerald has been much more successful in the time since he was Taoiseach than when he was Taoiseach. The problem with Deputy Varadkar's comments in the eyes of his party is that what he said is actually true in practice but did not work in theory, as Dr. FitzGerald himself would say-----

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: -----because it offended against the theory of loyalty to one's party at all costs. Loyalty to party at all costs has taken this Government down seriously bad roads on occasion, when there was a failure to criticise bad practice and bad decision making.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed). (24 Mar 2010)

Rónán Mullen: Yes. When can we hold a debate about how our political system is working and the quality of our political debate? There are thinking people on all sides of the House. We would be required to do a little more work to hold such a debate because Members could not simply ask head office for a few lines. We would actually have to apply our minds to the issues. We have the capacity to do that...