Results 9,161-9,180 of 11,861 for speaker:Brian Hayes

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: The reason the Minister of State will not accept the amendment is not constitutional but because the amendment is not appropriate to this legislation. It is appropriate to another Act.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: We could make this amendment if it were not constitutionally unsound.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: Why not fix the problems regarding the CD formats?

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: I move amendment No. 32: In page 9, subsection (1), line 28, to delete "on" and substitute "following". I have been reliably informed of an important principle in law, which states that ignorance of the law is no defence. One cannot use in court the fact that one has no knowledge of the law as a defence against a charge. I will read the current drafting of section 15(1) for the attention of...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: Yes. However, I have highlighted this drafting point in order to ensure that fairness prevails as to the date at which legislation becomes applicable. I am interested to hear the Minister of State's response on this matter.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: It is crystal clear.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: If I interpret the reply correctly, it means that re-enactment will be decided on a case-by-case basis. Is that what is being said? If that is the case, it would presumably clog up a lot of parliamentary time because it could not be done by means of statutory instrument.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: It is done by order.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: Just like the rising of the moon.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: Senator Ryan will have to return to it on Report Stage.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: I welcome the Minister of State to the House. The amendment proposes to delete subsection (2), which states "This Act comes into operation on 1 January 2004", and amend it to state "This Act comes into operation 6 months after the date of its passing.". I am against the amendment and I want to explain why. Section 15 deals with the date of passing of Acts of the Oireachtas. It is clear that...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: With respect, the Minister of State has not answered my question. I ask him to read section 15. Best practice, as outlined by the Government's legislation, states, in section 15(1): "The date of the passing of an Act of the Oireachtas is the date of the day on which the Bill for the Act is signed by the President." Why are we doing something different in respect of this Bill when the...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: I know, and it is not the Minister of State's fault that they were ruled out of order. I have not heard the rationale as to why this legislation will not be put in place once the President signs it.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: That is a very reasonable approach from a man from south County Dublin.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: As the Minister of State is aware, we dealt with legislation some weeks ago that repealed a raft of legislation dating back to 1309, before the foundation of the State.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: Yes, never mind me. The new legislation allowed us to clean up the Statute Book to make more sense of it. Section 2(2) states: "For the purposes of this Act, an enactment which has been replaced or has expired, lapsed or otherwise ceased to have effect is deemed to have been repealed." In this regard, does this House, where an Act has lapsed, is irrelevant or out of kilter with modern times,...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: And they are right.

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: I move amendment No. 3: In page 6, before section 5 but in Part 2, to insert the following new section: "5.—(1) All Acts shall contain a provision causing the Act to lapse in whole within a period not greater than three years. (2) An Act which has lapsed under this section may be renewed by a positive resolution of both Houses at any time prior to the expiry of the sunset period.". I said...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Under this amendment, an Act will lapse only if a positive resolution has not been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas. I understand that a great deal of primary legislation provides that the Act in question is subject to a mandatory automatic review. I do not think I will win this argument, but if this amendment is accepted, this provision...

Seanad: Interpretation Bill 2000: Committee Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Brian Hayes: The discussion has been useful but I am not aware of the average number of Acts passed by the Oireachtas in the 1990s comparison with the 1940s. We are now living in a much more complex and complicated society and, consequently, legislation is often needed to address modern problems. However, these problems sometimes lapse and a problem that existed in the 1960s is no longer a problem today....