Results 10,161-10,180 of 11,477 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 3: In page 9, line 7, to delete "A person is in material breach of his or her" and substitute "The clinical director may revoke a". I put this amendment on Committee Stage as well. It is an amendment to section 8. It is somewhat technical but it is to change the language in that the new section 13B, as currently drafted, has an Alice in Wonderland quality about it...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to Senator Regan for his points and support. I still believe there is something odd about the wording, as he said. Perhaps it is unnecessary to delete the words "A person is in material breach" but the difficulty arises with the second part of the sentence which states: "Where the clinical director on reasonable grounds believes that...". It is unfortunate that some other...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 4: In page 10, line 20, to delete "section 13" and substitute "sections 13, 13A, 13B and 13C". This is a technical amendment. I think I mentioned on Committee Stage that it might be necessary. Currently, subsection 8(c) of new section 13B provides that the board may exercise all the powers available to it under section 13. We wondered if that should not also read...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: No.

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 5: In page 11, line 15, to delete "(Insanity)" and substitute "(Mental Disorder)". This is an amendment about which we had extensive debate on Committee Stage, and I am glad Senator Quinn has supported it. Senator Regan also supported it on Committee Stage. It is a more substantial issue. It is about the language we are using in this legislation and it is most...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am pleased the Minister of State has acknowledged the need for this change. I accept entirely that a sea change is required in attitudes and culture. However, it has occurred elsewhere in the system in terms of psychiatric services, civil legislation and so on. It is unfortunate we cannot make the change in this legislation also. It is clearly an anachronism that is not only of the 20th...

Seanad: Criminal Law (Insanity) Bill 2010: Report and Final Stages (5 May 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I also thank the Minister of State and his officials for their work on this Bill. We had a productive and constructive debate and I am glad he took on board the issue of designating centres other than the Central Mental Hospital. It is a pity we could not move on from the use of the language of insanity but I very much look forward to the outcome of the review the Minister of State has...

Seanad: Order of Business. (29 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I call for a debate on prison conditions in the light of the forced resignation this week of the former governor of the Dóchas Centre and in the context of the opening today of the Prison Officers Association conference. On the resignation of the governor of the Dóchas Centre, I do not agree with her apparent equation of lesbianism with bullying and depression. She was quoted in the...

Seanad: Communications (Retention of Data) Bill 2009: Second Stage (29 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I welcome the Minister of State. The Labour Party broadly welcomes the purpose of the Bill. Ireland is obliged to pass legislation on foot of the 2006 directive. It is unfortunate, however, that the European Court of Justice has found Ireland to be in breach of our obligations due to the delay in transposing the directive. The Minister of State indicated one of the reasons for the delay...

Seanad: Order of Business. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: First, I thank the Leader and other colleagues in the House for such an excellent debate yesterday on women's participation in politics. It was historic and was the first time this matter had ever been debated formally in either House of the Oireachtas since the foundation of the State and I am delighted it took place. I also am delighted there was so much interest that it will be...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Before coming to amendment No. 1, I wish to have a matter clarified. The schedule we were given refers to "Committee and Remaining Stages". I believe we are only taking Committee Stage today.

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I was present for the Order of Business but do not recall that happening.

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 1: In page 3, subsection (2), line 29, after "provisions" to insert the following: ", provided that Part 2 shall come into operation in its entirety on a specified day". There is something of a contradiction in giving the Minister power in section 1(2) to commence the Bill in an open-ended fashion and to commence different sections at different times. However, the...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 2: In page 4, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following: " "maximum fine", in respect of a specified amount or within a specified range, includes a fixed fine of that amount or within that range.". As the expression "maximum fine" is used in other places, for example, in section 8, an ambiguity arises as to whether this means a particular maximum or whether it also...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 3: In page 4, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following subsection: "(2) The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may, by order, vary the amounts of money specified in subsection (1) from time to time having regard to changes in the value of money since the commencement date.". This provides that the Minister may by order vary the amounts of money...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I accept the Minister's point, it is better to err on the side of caution but most of these amendments are technical in nature and are being offered in a constructive spirit to strengthen the Bill. As I said on Second Stage, we welcome the Bill. The Irish Penal Reform Trust has also welcomed it. Any measure that reduces the number of people imprisoned for non-payment of fines must be...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 4: In page 4, subsection (1), line 20, after "enactment" to insert "amended by this Act or". The first amendment is a drafting amendment to facilitate the interpretation of the legislation amended by section 9 of the Bill so in future legislation will use the simple expression "class A fine" rather than the more unwieldy expression "class A fine within the meaning of this...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to the Minister that he considered the matter and consulted the drafting counsel on this. As a matter of general principle, it is preferable to have more accessible and concise language in criminal legislation. There is a huge amount of unwieldy language and an unnecessary number of different Acts on the Statute Book. A consolidation project is underway but here we are trying...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to the Minister for accepting and acknowledging the Labour Party amendments. We tabled amendment No. 5 and the same point is made in the other amendments. We were concerned that in the absence of these amendments there would be an anomaly in respect of offences committed under Acts on the commencement date. It is a technical amendment but I am grateful the Minister accepted...

Seanad: Fines Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (28 Apr 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I support Senator Regan's points. In the context of what the Minister said about the caution with which the Attorney General approached the issue of primary versus secondary legislation, it is interesting it was thought better, for example, to make changes to the value of money in the Bill through primary rather than secondary legislation. In my earlier response to the Minister on amendment...