Results 10,061-10,080 of 11,444 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed) (3 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: It is important the House debates this matter and that all male colleagues take an active role in it. It is men who are the users of prostitutes.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed) (3 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: We should be working together on this. However, as Senator Keaveney said, we will not be lectured by male Members on this topic.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed) (3 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: When will that recommendation come back to the House?

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed) (3 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: That is not what the Senator said yesterday, with respect to the Deputy Leader.

Seanad: Order of Business (Resumed) (3 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Excuse me. In answer to my question, when exactly will the heads of the Bill be published?

Seanad: Order of Business (2 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: It is. There is a lobby today of Friends of the Earth and Stop Climate Chaos.

Seanad: Order of Business (2 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Like the other speakers, I welcome the announcement that Senator Callely will make a statement following the Order of Business. As the other speakers have noted, Members require a full and comprehensive statement to resolve this matter. It has been a most unwelcome distraction in a week of serious political events both here and elsewhere and has served to bring all Members into disrepute....

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I second the amendment which deals with an important principle. As Senator Mullen said, it relates to a very real issue of pressing concern to many apartment owners, the level — often the excessive level — of service charge payable. Generally, the provisions of section 15 are to be welcomed, as they will, I hope, guard against excessive service charges being levied on apartment owners....

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 47: In page 19, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following: "(m) annulling house rules or any provision thereof if such rules interfere unreasonably with the rights of an owner of a unit.". This amendment is self-explanatory. It would give the court an additional power under section 19 by inserting a new paragraph (m) enabling the court to make an order "annulling...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 50: In page 20, to delete lines 38 to 46, to delete page 21 and in page 22, to delete lines 1 to 9 and substitute the following: "22.—(1) (a) Upon the request of any party to an application under section 19, the court may at any stage during the course of the proceedings (including immediately after the issue of the proceedings), if it considers that an Alternative...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Not in light of what the Minister has said.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 51: In page 24, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: "1. Sections 2 to 4 (obligation to have owners' management company).". This amendment proposes that developments of two, three or four units should have owners' management companies. If this change is not made, the existing paragraphs of the Schedule will make little sense. I suppose it is a clarifying or...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am not pressing the amendment.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I think that is called damning with faint praise.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister and his officials, who have been very helpful. I would like to express my personal gratitude to them for the accommodating way in which they have dealt with Members on this Bill. We had a good debate on Committee and Report Stages. I thank the Apartment Owners Network and the RIAI for their help and submissions. As the Minister said, it is to be hoped this Bill will...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I should have referenced the Minister's amendment No. 10 which seems a good first step in meeting some of the concerns about completion the RIAI and the Labour Party have. The amendment requires a written contract between the developer and the owner's management company. While that would allay some of the concerns about the need to tighten up the completion provisions, the concern still...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for his reply and I am grateful to him for indicating he is willing to accept amendment No. 50 in principle.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am also grateful that he wants to resolve the vexed question of completion in some way. I regret it cannot be addressed through amendment in this House but I echo what he said. We are trying to help him to resolve the vexed issue of completion through amendments Nos. 1 and 26, in particular, and also through amendments Nos. 15, 27 and 50, which deal with the retention principle. Members...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 4: In page 4, to delete lines 41 to 45 and in page 5, to delete lines 1 and 2. We debated this on Committee Stage. The amendment was suggested by the Apartment Owners Network to delete the definition of "relevant parts" in section 1 because their view, as consumers, is that the developer should have to indicate what are intended to be the common areas in the planning...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Report and Final Stages (1 Jun 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I second the amendment.