Results 4,761-4,780 of 11,403 for speaker:Ivana Bacik
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Precisely.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I will reserve my position in respect of the other amendments, which we will not reach until later.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Agreed.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: The House can decide the matter. It can agree to divide. I am calling a vote on it.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: No. There has always been a practice here in this regard but I do not have the Standing Orders of the House in front of me.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I have been here for some time.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I am trying to facilitate debate.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I thank the Acting Chair
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I thank the Acting Chairman. They are very different amendments.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: The Acting Chair has ruled.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Sorry, I understood that the Acting Chair made a ruling to the opposite effect a moment ago when he stated that amendment No. 13 would dealt with separately. The other amendments-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: In all my time in this House, and as the Acting Chair just pointed out I have been here a while, I do not recall a Minister intervening to make a proposal after the Chair has ruled. This is a matter for the House, not the Minister. It is not a political proposition.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Excuse me, I did not interrupt the Minister.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I do not know why the Minister felt he needed to intervene on this.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: I did not interrupt Senator Conway.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: The Chair heard the Minister and I do not believe he had any function in making a proposal on the grouping. All he said was that he understood groupings were generally made for a good reason. He did not speak to the substance of this grouping.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: May I express my view then?
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: As the proposer of amendment No. 13 and as somebody who has a view on the substance of these amendments, I would say that they are not suitable for grouping. I will wait until the Acting Chair is free to hear what I have to say.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Amendment No. 13, which is my amendment, deals with the provisions on page 8 relating to the definitions of "practising barrister" and "practising solicitor". I have quite a bit to say on the amendment. For some reason, it has been grouped with amendments Nos. 49 to 53, inclusive, and amendment No. 59. If one looks to those amendments, one sees where they come in. I will wait until the...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage (Resumed) (10 Dec 2019)
Ivana Bacik: Amendments Nos. 49 to 53, inclusive, are very different. They come in much later in the text of the Bill and do not relate to the definitions of "practising solicitor" and "practising barrister". I have scrutinised them and I do not see why they are grouped. Amendment No. 13 is a discrete proposal that deals with a particular definition. I do not see the reason for grouping it with the...