Results 1,141-1,160 of 1,415 for speaker:Tom Kitt

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: These amendments to section 6 are all technical drafting amendments to simplify the language. They align subsequent references to Acts and statutory instruments back to the reference to any Act or statutory instrument.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is another highly technical amendment.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: These four amendments to section 8 are all technical drafting amendments to shorten and simplify the section.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is a technical drafting amendment to section 9. In this case the clarity of the subsection is improved by repeating the words, "Part, Chapter, section, Schedule or other". It improves the language in this section.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is a technical drafting amendment to section 9 so that the reference in line 29 to a provision relates back to it when the example is in the Schedule.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is a technical amendment to section 14. Contextually, "session" must be a reference to a parliamentary session. However, for the sake of greater clarity it was felt appropriate to expressly refer to "parliamentary session".

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: These three amendments to section 18 are all technical drafting amendments to improve clarity. In the case of amendment No.24 the final phrase in paragraph (d), namely, "whose adoption is recognised by virtue of the law for the time being in force in the State;" can logically only refer to a child adopted outside the State. The adoption of children under the Adoption Act is recognised by the...

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: The reference in section 18(g), "subject to sections 6 and 7", is inappropriate as only section 7 qualifies this section. The wording in paragraph (g) has also been rearranged for clarity. In addition, the opportunity has been taken to deal with any further developments in the layout of Bills that might be adopted by providing for shoulder notes. The amendment by the Seanad merely facilitates...

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: No. It is a permissive provision. Shoulder notes appear at the top of a page and marginal notes appear on the side. It is to allow for changes that may occur.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: In section 18(1), the words the Seanad amendment deleted add nothing to the text. If an Act refers to another time zone, this will be clear from the context of the reference. This provision will not apply by virtue of section 4 of the Bill.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: To clarify, it simply allows for possible changes decided by the House, bearing in mind that we are simply talking about the layout of legislation. I understand all legislation is included, including primary legislation and statutory instruments. It is to allow any changes in respect of shoulder notes and marginal notes.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: In our system, shoulder notes are not part of legislation.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: As is the case with many of the other amendments, this is a drafting change to improve clarity. It is to ensure the provision is interpreted in such a way that the words "except in so far as the contrary intention appears in" relate to what is now provided for in paragraphs (a) and (b) and not just paragraph (a).

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is a technical drafting amendment. The use of the indefinite article rather than the definite article is more appropriate in the context of subsection (3).

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: Seanad amendments Nos. 30 and 31 are minor technical amendments.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This is also a very minor technical amendment.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: Seanad amendments Nos. 33 to 36, inclusive, are minor technical amendments to section 26.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: This amendment is to prevent section 26(2)(c) being interpreted in a manner that would result in interference with the judicial process, in other words, when a provision is repealed and re-enacted, with the modification that section 26(2)(c) cannot be used to override section 27(1), and enable the modification to be used to affect any case already before a court when the modification became...

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: My advice is that it is to prevent the Oireachtas from interfering with a case before the courts.

Interpretation Bill 2000: From the Seanad (5 Oct 2005)

Tom Kitt: We must respect the independence of the courts in this matter and ensure the Dáil does not interfere with them. I understand the Deputy's point.