Results 11,061-11,080 of 11,433 for speaker:Michael Kitt

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

Michael Kitt: This section was inserted on Committee Stage in the Dáil. Acts of the European Community and European Union, normally directives and regulations but also the treaties of the European Community, are often referred to in Acts of the Oireachtas and statutory instruments. From time to time, these regulations and directives are revoked and made again with or without modification. The question...

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

Michael Kitt: The answer to Senator Hayes's question is "Yes". It has to be done. It would not necessarily clog up time because it would be done by ministerial regulation.

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

Michael Kitt: If an EU directive changes, we need a new regulation or primary legislation.

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

Michael Kitt: This would mean that the Oireachtas committee on secondary legislation would have an important role in scrutinising legislation.

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

Michael Kitt: This is a technical amendment to carry through an amendment on Report Stage in the Dáil by deleting the obsolete definition of "Valuation Acts" and inserting appropriate reference to the Valuation Act 2001.

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

Michael Kitt: The additional words now proposed to be inserted concern the definition of "year" in the Interpretation Act 1937.

Seanad: Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2005: Second Stage. (29 Jun 2005)

Michael Kitt: Tomorrow.

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

Michael Kitt: The amendment is self-explanatory. It is considered that six months is an adequate amount of time to enable interested parties to apprise themselves of the Act.

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

Michael Kitt: There are no covert conspiracies on my part. I read what the Senators said in the debate on the Bill. This is a technical area, we are updating legislation and re-enacting law. Nobody is shivering in his or her boots waiting for the results of our deliberations. We are trying to deal with this in an honest, transparent way. As Chief Whip I assure the Senators that whenever this legislation...

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

Michael Kitt: We will come to that.

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

Michael Kitt: I have an answer for the Senator.

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

Michael Kitt: I always enjoy my visits to the Seanad and try my best to accommodate reasonable suggestions. I am willing to consider this in the light of what both Senators have said. With regard to the rationale behind our wording, Senator Hayes mentioned section 15 which states: "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...

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

Michael Kitt: The Cathaoirleach has clarified that the Government intends to delete section 28 which refers to the European communities. There are issues relating to cross-referencing of European legislation and Council directives with which I will be glad to deal. On Senator Ryan's specific question, section 2 deals with domestic law and concentrates on that. I may have to come back to Senator Brian Hayes...

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

Michael Kitt: Where are the relevant references? My officials cannot find them.

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

Michael Kitt: I have been told that the word "absurd" is well used by the courts. This section provides that this legislation does not apply to another Act if "the other enactment would be changed in intent or become unclear or absurd". Like the Senator, I favour more user-friendly language. The explanation I have been given is that the word in question is well used by the courts.

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

Michael Kitt: I thank the Senator.

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

Michael Kitt: This technical drafting amendment will clarify the language being used in this section. While the words "except in so far as the contrary intention appears in this Act" in section 4(1) mean that the Interpretation Act can apply, in part, to another Act, this is expressly provided for by the insertion in the section of the phrase "a provision of this Act". It is a technical drafting amendment.

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

Michael Kitt: I am aware that Senator Hayes has raised this matter previously. I will outline the reasons for the Government's opposition to the proposal. The Office of the Attorney General has advised that an automatic lapsing provision, of the nature proposed in this amendment, would create constitutional and major administrative problems. The amendment does not deal with the interpretation and...

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

Michael Kitt: Was that when the Fianna Fáil-Labour Party Government was in office?

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

Michael Kitt: In reply to Senator Brian Hayes, I share the views of Senator Ryan on this matter. If one considers the dangers of lapsing legislation, leaving aside the views of the Attorney General on constitutional issues, the argument would fall on examining the issue from a more positive perspective. As the Senator rightly acknowledged, we are considering revision of all the legislation and getting rid...