Results 3,161-3,180 of 18,761 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I will wait until the next group then.

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I have no particular objection to the amendments that are being made here. I believe I was the person who pointed out the English and Irish language issue.

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I thank the Minister-----

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: -----for upholding the status of the Irish language in this legislation. One thing that is possibly a little bit tangential to what we are talking about is that I notice the power to make a regulation under the Bill can apply to different types of containers. This amendment does not apply to this. If one sells wine by the case, will the case have to be broken open? Is that the intention or...

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: -----on the outside of the case be enough? If a person buys six or 12 bottles of wine in a container, which some people, including myself, do on occasion, will the person in the off-licence have to open up the container and start sticking labels on everything inside it, or will it be sufficient to put the label on the outside of the case?

Seanad: Public Health (Alcohol) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (10 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: Quite a lot of bottles are sold in boxes or novelty boxes. Is it going to be important that the box will have to opened up to put the label on the bottle?

Seanad: Order of Business (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: He is still looking for a floating vote.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: On a point of order, we were having a discussion on section 22 and the Minister was about to reply to some queries which were put to him.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: We are not allowed. It is a criminal offence to talk about it.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: The Minister briefly mentioned section 28 and he said we would be coming back to it. In the last debate here, I recall asking the Minister whether it was his understanding of the legislation that its purpose was to bring about a situation in which the members of the Government, for a time, would be kept in the dark about which of the High Court, Court of Appeal or Supreme Court judges had...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I will elaborate.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I flag them as points on which I require answers. To answer Senator Norris's point, if a High Court judge was interested in promotion to the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal, or a Court of Appeal judge was interested in promotion to the presidency of that court or the Supreme Court or to Chief Justice, or a member of the Supreme Court was interested in promotion to Chief Justice, the...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: When we come to section 28, we will have to deal with the question of whether it is the effect of the Bill, as it currently exists, that the people to whom I referred will have to apply to get onto the new body.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I am just explaining it to Senator Norris.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: Section 22(3) provides that the chairperson shall not be required to give an account before a committee for any matter which has been the subject of proceedings before a court or tribunal in the State. Subsection (2) imposes on the chairperson of the commission the obligation to attend before an Oireachtas committee to give account for the general administration of the commission. In that...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: The Statute of Limitations might apply then.

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: Perhaps we can forget for a moment Senator Norris's concern about what may or may not happen in the courts in the future. Instead, I would like to refer to something that has happened in the courts in the past. Perhaps we might consider circumstances in which an Oireachtas committee is concerned that an officer of the commission has been wrongfully dismissed, bullied or wrongfully removed...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: I cannot understand how the fact that something has been before the courts could mean it would be contrary to public policy, or wrong in any way, for an Oireachtas committee to be allowed to ask the chairperson of the commission, as the official responsible and accountable for the general administration of the commission, to explain how it happened that money was spent and somebody was...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: There would be no accountability whatsoever. I cannot understand why such a provision should be allowed to stand. I would like to come back to another point later in this debate. In the circumstances I have outlined, why should the fact that the matter has been the subject of court proceedings be of such relevance? It would not need to have been the subject of an open trial. It would...

Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (4 Oct 2018)

Michael McDowell: Exactly. This section allows the chairperson to refuse to answer questions about such a case on the basis that the statute expressly prohibits him or her from doing so, or from being required to provide answers in any shape or form. The High Court would have to accept that as the literal meaning of this section.