Results 2,421-2,440 of 18,761 for speaker:Michael McDowell
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: Hold on a second. Just wait and see. I will come to that. The Minister is misreading the amendment.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: I know what the amendment is about.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: The Acting Chairman should not try to hassle me. I am-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: The Chair is doing so.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: This is a Committee Stage process-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: -----and the Minister, if he thinks I am making a mistake, is perfectly entitled to point that out.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: -----and I am entitled to respond-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: The amendment states, "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 40, nothing in this Act affects, limits or inhibits the right of the Government in any case where it advises the President to appoint any member of the Supreme Court [...] to any judicial office". Therefore, it does apply to a member of the Supreme Court being made Chief Justice, for instance. Let us get that straight. With...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: He is misreading it, unfortunately.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: Yes. This reminds me of F.E. Smith, Lord Birkenhead. I saw him on television last night or the night before on the RTÉ programme "The Irish Revolution". He was in court on one occasion and a judge said to him that he had been listening to him for the preceding two hours and was none the wiser. F.E. Smith said he agreed but that the judge was better informed. This amendment deals...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: -----because it would pre-empt the whole idea.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: This would suggest that the Government had already made up its mind about who it wanted to appoint.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: Exactly. Therefore, the follow-on vacancy in the Supreme Court, on foot of an ordinary judge of that court being appointed as Chief Justice, would be sent out for filling. Is it even in any sense unfair to say it is quite probable that one of the applicants for the ordinary position in the Supreme Court would be a member of the Court of Appeal? Where the Government gets a recommendation...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: Through the Chair, Senator Craughwell was talking about the teaching profession. It can take up to 18 months to fill some positions in certain schools.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: No, but he is-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: -----talking about the same principle, namely, that vacancies cannot be filled on a pre-emptive basis. One cannot start a process for a non-vacancy on the basis that one thinks one would be creating it by effecting a particular outcome because this would prejudice the whole arrangement. That is what Senator Craughwell is talking about. He said that, in his experience as a teacher, it may...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: It was always the case in my day that if a vacancy was created, the question of who would be appointed to fill that vacancy would be considered.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: I am referring to the appointment of judges. Of course, the reason that was done was that under the 2002 Act the appointment of judges to posts within the Judiciary fell outside the remit of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board. If the Government decided to select a judge, such as an ordinary judge of the Supreme Court or High Court, to higher office - my experience predates the Court...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: There was no absence of process. Under the Bill, the process is one involving an absence of judges for long periods and a trickle-down effect whereby a vacancy is created in court after court. There is no absence of process whatever in the former arrangement. The Government would be well advised to ensure that if it creates a vacancy at one level of the Judiciary, it acts smartly to fill...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (19 Feb 2019)
Michael McDowell: It is obvious that Senator Craughwell was drawing an analogy regarding what happens when one has cascading vacancies. That is what we are now dealing with. It is introducing an artificial and undesirable delay to the process of appointment to judicial office to stipulate that a Government which decides to appoint a judge to another position in the Judiciary would not be able to decide to...