Advanced search
Show most relevant results first | Most recent results are first | Show use by person

Search only Ivana BacikSearch all speeches

Results 10,301-10,320 of 11,477 for speaker:Ivana Bacik

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 11: In page 42, subsection (1), lines 34 and 35, to delete "and the Revenue Commissioners". I mentioned this on Second Stage because it seemed unnecessary to require duplicate reporting obligations to both the Garda and the Revenue Commissioners, given that one would hope for liaison between the two State agencies. I must point out again that I am not seeking to water...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am interested in those figures which tell a story that might be worth pursuing. I accept what the Minister said and do not intend to seek in any way to have the provisions watered down. There is a concern that for too long we have allowed tax evasion offences and white collar crime to be dealt with and tackled in a different manner to theft offences. I accept circumstances have changed,...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 12: In page 49, subsection (1), line 24, after "Chapter 3" to insert the following: ", as the Minister shall prescribe by way of regulation,". This amendment arises from an issue I raised on Second Stage on the requirements specified under section 55. I see the Minister has dealt with the issue in amendment No. 13 which spells out in much more detail the particular...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 15: In page 58, subsection (1), line 45, after "oath" to insert "or affirmation". This is a very simple and straightforward amendment which is not strictly necessary. It simply seeks to insert the words "or affirmation" after "oath". I know the law allows affirmations as well as oaths and the Minister may say it is not strictly necessary - if I can pre-empt what he will...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: In that case I practically wrote the Minister's script. It would be nice in future legislation if the word "affirmation" instead of "oath" was used. That would be a little change.

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 16: In page 78, subsection (2), line 44, after "purpose," to insert "as giving rise to civil or criminal liability or". We welcome and support section 112, which relates to whistleblowers. However, we are of the view that it is inadequate because it only covers protection against an action for breach of confidence and does not provide an immunity from liability for such...

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Again, I knew what the Minister would say in respect of this amendment. We are of the opinion it would clarify the position further for potential whistleblowers. However, I will not press the matter at this stage. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Section 112 agreed to. Sections 113 to 122, inclusive, agreed to. Schedules 1 and 2 agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported with amendments.

Seanad: Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Bill 2009: Committee Stage. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thank the Minister for that and for the fact he has committed to return to a number of my amendments on Report Stage. Report Stage ordered for Tuesday, 23 March 2009.

Seanad: Order of Business. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I seek a debate on planning guidelines and, in particular, on planning for urban centres. The Dublin city development plan is open for consultation and submissions are due to be in by tomorrow. An interesting issue arose yesterday during the debate on the Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009 about the right to dry and whether people living in apartments should be able to air dry their laundry....

Seanad: Order of Business. (11 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I did not say that, Leader. I never said that.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: There is no obligation on the developer to pay a contribution to the sinking fund. Will the Minister comment on this? I did not draft an amendment in this regard but other Members and I received an e-mail from property management personnel on the matter. The owner of each unit, including the developer or building contractor, is obliged to pay service charges but there is no obligation on...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I put this badly. The three-year timeframe is the difficulty. Section 15(6) states, "The obligation to establish a sinking fund and to make contributions shall apply on the happening of the later" of three years or "18 months since the coming into operation of this section". Clearly by then the developer should have exited. Should good estate management practice not be that the sinking...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 59: In page 15, subsection (1), line 6, after "make" to insert ", amend or revoke". I am grateful to the Minister for accepting the principle underpinning this simple, technical amendment to enable the owner's management company not only to make house rules but also to amend or revoke them. The Minister's amendment No. 60 addresses this issue by providing that house...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I move amendment No. 61: In page 16, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following subsection: "(11) House rules shall have due regard to environmental considerations and in particular may not prohibit air drying of laundry.". The amendment addresses a bugbear for any of us who has lived in an apartment. There is a right to dry campaign that points out the environmental and personal hygiene...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: -----who consider the hanging of one's smalls on balconies or from windows to be unsightly. This is perhaps a rather contentious point but it should be considered, given the imperative to try to reduce carbon emissions. Tumble drying is one of the most energy intensive household tasks but it can be the only alternative in drying one's clothes if one is living in a confined space. One...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am grateful to Senators Quinn and Coffey for their support for the amendment. I was being somewhat flippant earlier but I want to make one further important point. Inserting a provision such as this in the Bill would not only send an important signal in terms of environmental considerations but it would also force a change in apartment design. Senator Coffey asked if there were ways to...

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: Washing my dirty linen in public.

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I am trying to think of another dreadful pun to wrap up the debate on the amendment. I note what the Minister and Senator McDonald said about restrictive covenants. The amendment could be seen as having a less broad effect and aims to ensure that where a lease is silent on this issue and there is no restrictive covenant contained in it, the house rules could not then prohibiting air drying....

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I wish to move amendment No. 64. I am grateful the Minister has indicated he will accept it. It is a technical-----

Seanad: Multi-Unit Developments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (10 Mar 2010)

Ivana Bacik: I thought the Minister said he would accept amendment No. 64 but not amendment No. 65.

   Advanced search
Show most relevant results first | Most recent results are first | Show use by person

Search only Ivana BacikSearch all speeches