Results 1,161-1,180 of 11,469 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I will reserve my right to introduce an amendment, if necessary, on Report Stage. I support the principle behind the section to move to alternative dispute resolution. Question put and agreed to. Sections 23 and 24 agreed to. SECTION 25.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I support Government amendment No. 74. However, I have one query for the Minister on it. Item No. 3 of Schedule 3 requires that the safety file be transferred. Is that sufficiently specific? A fire safety file requires the production of all relevant documents that might be required to facilitate the owners and management company in meeting their statutory obligations under fire safety...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 72: In page 21, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: "1. Sections 2 to 4 (obligation to have owners' management company).". This amendment seeks to ensure that a two, three or four unit development would still have a management company, otherwise it was thought the existing paragraphs of the Schedule would have made little sense. I am not sure if that is...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I will not press the amendment at this stage. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Schedule 1 agreed to. NEW SCHEDULE. Government amendment No. 73: In page 21, after line 14, to insert the following: 1. Section 4 - (Obligation of developer to transfer ownership of common areas of completed developments to owners' management company). 2. Section 5 - (Obligations to complete development to remain...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: The Minister has kindly indicated he will consider quite a number of provisions in the Bill between now and Report Stage. Given that Senator Quinn and I have said we would like to see changes made on Report Stage rather than in the Dáil, on the basis of the full debate we have had today, does the proposed date give sufficient time for consideration? I am not opposing Senator O'Donovan's...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Acting Chairman.

Seanad: Order of Business. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I seek a debate on planning guidelines and, in particular, on planning for urban centres. The Dublin city development plan is open for consultation and submissions are due to be in by tomorrow. An interesting issue arose yesterday during the debate on the Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009 about the right to dry and whether people living in apartments should be able to air dry their laundry....

Seanad: Order of Business. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I did not say that, Leader. I never said that.

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 1: In page 11, between lines 10 and 11, to insert the following subsection: "(4) The Minister shall within three months after the commencement of this Act publish a five-year anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing strategy illustrating how the objects of the Act are to be pursued, such a strategy to be evaluated and revised at the end of the five year...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for that full reply. While we all welcome the Bill and share its objectives, we are simply trying to make it more effective. On Second Stage, I spoke of the many challenges we face in dealing with white collar crime. The Minister has mentioned some of those, in particular the rapidly changing nature of this sort of crime, which is increasingly sophisticated. Given the...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I welcome these amendments. In fact, I was proposing to raise on Committee Stage the issue of how the competent authority under section 60 would deal with persons who were not practitioners, given the competent authority would be the professional body. I am glad therefore to see this issue has been dealt with.

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Why is it that "insolvency practitioners" are not included in this definitional section? I understand there was an understanding by the Chartered Accountants Institute that they would have been included but they did not appear in the Bill. I understand that not all insolvency practitioners are accountants or solicitors and would not necessarily be covered. I am taking up Senator...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 7: In page 38, subsection (10), between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following: " "cohabitant" in relation to a person means a person cohabiting with the first-mentioned person as man and wife or in an equivalent same sex relationship;". I am agreeing it although they are very different amendments but they relate to the same section and to definitions so I am happy to...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: The institute of chartered accountants, Chartered Accountants Ireland, raised with us the inclusion of the word "agent" in section 41 despite the fact that under section 44, there is a defence for an employee but none for an agent. I have no desire to water down the provisions of the Bill, but I am responding to a query put to me by the institute about the position of agents who are...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for saying he would consider this again before Report Stage. I would be grateful if he would do so. I accept his explanation that "agent" is a catch-all word, but the problem is that there are people who are ostensibly agents but are really, in all but name, employees.

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 11: In page 42, subsection (1), lines 34 and 35, to delete "and the Revenue Commissioners". I mentioned this on Second Stage because it seemed unnecessary to require duplicate reporting obligations to both the Garda and the Revenue Commissioners, given that one would hope for liaison between the two State agencies. I must point out again that I am not seeking to water...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am interested in those figures which tell a story that might be worth pursuing. I accept what the Minister said and do not intend to seek in any way to have the provisions watered down. There is a concern that for too long we have allowed tax evasion offences and white collar crime to be dealt with and tackled in a different manner to theft offences. I accept circumstances have changed,...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 12: In page 49, subsection (1), line 24, after "Chapter 3" to insert the following: ", as the Minister shall prescribe by way of regulation,". This amendment arises from an issue I raised on Second Stage on the requirements specified under section 55. I see the Minister has dealt with the issue in amendment No. 13 which spells out in much more detail the particular...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 15: In page 58, subsection (1), line 45, after "oath" to insert "or affirmation". This is a very simple and straightforward amendment which is not strictly necessary. It simply seeks to insert the words "or affirmation" after "oath". I know the law allows affirmations as well as oaths and the Minister may say it is not strictly necessary - if I can pre-empt what he will...