Results 5,741-5,760 of 11,407 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Civil Law (Missing Persons) Bill 2016: Second Stage (16 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and commend Senators Colm Burke, Marie-Louise O'Donnell and Ruane on proposing this important Bill. In particular, I commend Senator Colm Burke who has worked on this issue for a good deal of time. It is good to see this Bill come before the House on this agreed basis. I echo Senator Ruane's comments that it is a sign of the Seanad at its best...

Seanad: Order of Business (15 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Leader for organising tonight's debate with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs in attendance, on foot of the requests made here yesterday. Clearly, many more questions need to be answered on the political events of the past week, the differences in views and the alternative facts, one might say, expressed by different Ministers on what happened at different meetings.As...

Seanad: Commencement Matters: Immigration Status (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for coming to the House to deal with this question. In light of the findings of the Court of Appeal on the rights of non-EEA nationals who were in Ireland as students before 2011 and who wish to continue to stay and work here, I would like the Minister for Justice and Equality to state how many cases are awaiting her decision and to make a...

Seanad: Commencement Matters: Immigration Status (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I believe it is important that we raise the wider context and the implications of this case while being conscious that it is under appeal. This case concerns two families because there was a related appeal judgment that was given on the same day in the Luximon case. In the case I spoke about, the Balchand case which is under appeal, the couple involved had a son who was born in Ireland in...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and express the strong support of the Labour group for this Bill and for the need to secure its passage through the Seanad. I welcome the many groups represented here tonight and the many guests I have here in the Gallery. Many have worked with me and with a whole range of people for many years to secure the passage of legislation like this. I...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I believe Senator McDowell is under a misapprehension that section 21(3) was amended in the Dáil. It was not. I have the Bill as passed by the Seanad in front of me. We had a full debate on this section and section 21(3) was unamended.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I did want to say a little more on that.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: That section was unchanged in the Dáil. That is the point.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: Can I just say one more point in respect of the point that the Senator has raised? The Minister has answered him. The presumption is simply of an evidential burden. It certainly does not require that the accused would give evidence. Absolutely not. I remind the Senator that we have many other clear, instances of this. Probably the best known is section 4(2) of the Criminal Justice Act...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I am arguing-----

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: No. I am objecting to the proposal to recommit. That is the point. I am explaining why I am objecting.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I am objecting to the proposal to recommit, and I believe the Minister has also objected, on the basis that this was something that we had already debated in the Seanad and which was not changed any further in the Dáil. We have other examples of this sort of presumption, which does not operate in such a way as to require an accused person to give evidence. Far from it. They simply...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I object to being singled out like that.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: It was a general opposition to the Senator's motion.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I never said it was. I was speaking about a different section.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I did not. My argument is being misrepresented by Senator McDowell. I never entered the debate on section 22. My point about section 21 absolutely stands. That presumption is very much similar.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I wish to correct the record. Senator McDowell is suggesting I made an argument I did not make. I entirely agree with him that section 22 is very different. Its phrasing is different. Section 22 was added in the Dáil, and we did not debate it in the Seanad, so it is entirely different to section 21.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I did not make any argument earlier about section 22. The point I was making was about section 21. I entirely agree with Senator McDowell that these are entirely different provisions. They are entirely different offences and the format of section 22 is very different. However, I take issue with the fact that he is suggesting, I think, that section 22, despite concerning an offence by a...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: In section 22 the Oireachtas is clearly displacing the normal statutory interpretation rule by providing explicitly that a civil standard of proof must be adhered to by the defendant there. Reading it again it is correct to say that section 22 imposes a heavier burden and obligation on the defendant because it requires that they prove on a balance of probabilities that they were reasonably...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 2015: [Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil] Report and Final Stages (14 Feb 2017)

Ivana Bacik: I was right about section 22, was I not?