Results 2,221-2,240 of 18,726 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Right, I had missed that.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: I stand corrected by the Minister. I had forgotten about the subsection in section 40. Owing to his stated opposition to Senator Bacik's amendment, I had assumed there was not a process of ordering the list in accordance with the commission's preference. To return to the question of members of the commission being placed at number three rather than number one in the order of preference....

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Just leaving it to the commission to make up its own mind is hardly satisfactory. If the purpose of this legislation is to have a transparent process and one is going to say that the commission is obliged to give an order of preference, surely that information must be available to the people recommended, or not, as a matter of law, not just as a matter of the commission's discretion? If I...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: I think the Senator is saying that the section 53(5)(h) does not deal with the point that I made. To return to section 40(2), to which the Minister drew our attention a moment ago, it is very clear. It states: "Where this subsection applies, the Commission shall [not may] in accordance with this Act, recommend to the Minister, in respect of the judicial office concerned, the names of 3...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: The commission is not entitled to give an unranked recommendation. It must rank if section 40(2) means anything.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Is the Minister willing to accept an amendment to the amendment in order to deal with the time issue?

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Yes.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: I will press it because I believe strongly that the Bill would be improved by this amendment. Even if it does require further tweaking at a later point, that can be done on Report Stage.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: My position is simple. My amendment would improve the Bill dramatically. If there is further tweaking to be done, that is what Report Stage is all about.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 93c:In page 31, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following:“47. It shall be the duty of the Commission to notify every person who has applied to the Commission to be considered for recommendation for appointment to any judicial office as to whether or not such person has been so recommended by the Commission in accordance with the provisions of this...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: -----approach to the issue? If we expect unsuccessful and successful candidates to be told whether they have been short-listed, we should instruct the commission through the legislation that this is the policy it is to apply. It only makes sense. Imagine dealing with the scenario we discussed earlier. The President of the High Court has recused himself from the process and allowed his...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: In view of that, I will not be pressing my amendment.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Yes.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Which amendments are being discussed together?

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Why are we discussing my amendments with the Minister's? They have nothing to do with the provisions of amendments Nos. 94 and 95.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Amendments Nos. 96 and 97 relate to a different topic.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: They are quite separate and we should deal with them separately.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: In amendments Nos. 94 and 95, the Minister is putting in place the necessary outworking of his policy in respect of recusal. I ask him to explain what happens if the President of the High Court or the President of the Court of Appeal applies for judicial office. Is that covered already?

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: There may be a hole in the Minister's amendment.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (10 Apr 2019)

Michael McDowell: Section 47(3) states: "The person shall take no part in the performance by the Commission of the particular function and, accordingly, shall neither attend any meeting of it held for the purpose of the performance of the particular function nor cast any vote in relation to any decision falling to be made by it for that purpose." We are now, through amendment No. 95, putting in subsection...