Results 15,481-15,500 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: May I speak on the general idea behind it?

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I want to ask one question of the Minister but it may be more appropriate to the section. I will be guided by the Cathaoirleach on this. On the reference to Chief Superintendent and so on, in the past two days, as is my wont coming from my house to here, which is a short distance, there were three national charities collecting on both occasions. I support all of them. One was Concern, one...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: No. In most cases, directors of charitable organisations may not receive any remuneration and they expose themselves to risk without getting any reward and this should also be borne in mind. I withdraw the amendment.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I understand that point.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I have a problem with the whole business of buying and selling spiritual matter, as it seems to me to be——

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: ——close to simony. That is exactly what I was going to say. The selling of indulgences was one of the things that started off the Reformation. I have bought such things because, although I do not approve of it theologically, I respect the feelings of other people, particularly when they are grieving. Sometimes people are comforted by having a mass said, and I respect this. What one...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: Clarendon Street. I thank the Senator. I am never terribly comfortable with shops in churches. This is not just a matter for one religious denomination; I go to St. Patrick's every Sunday and we have a shop inside——

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: Exactly. The Senator anticipated me. I said to them several times that if I was attacked by religious fervour I would go after them with a whip and whip the money changers out of the temple. Actually, they sell rosary beads and all the rest of it. It is really quite a flagrant money-making exercise, but at least the money goes to the church and towards sustaining the architectural fabric...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: My conscience is often at me. I do not think these cards have the slightest effect. It is exactly the same, as far as I am concerned, as Lourdes and Fatima and such places. I do not believe the Blessed Virgin Mary has appeared in these places.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I do not, but I respect them, because I think they are holy places. They are sanctified by the suffering and the prayers of the people who go there. I will not go on. I will tell Senator O'Toole privately what I think about this. Let it be a reserved sacrament.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: The Minister of State has fundamentally misunderstood the purpose and function of Seanad Éireann under the Constitution. We are here to amend and improve legislation, not maintain the status quo, which is an absurd position. I am profoundly shocked to discover that the instructions came from the Revenue Commissioners. We have at last flushed it out. They are not a legislative body and...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: The Senator is a genius.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: Not only is it not good enough, it is an insult to the House. If the Minister of State wished to sustain the position that the advice comes from the Revenue Commissioners, presumably they produced an argument. Is it a budgetary issue? Do they think money will be saved? Will the Minister of State be kind enough to outline how much money he will save by excluding human rights? It would be...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: When the Minister of State refers to policy, is he talking about a Cabinet decision? If there is to be a delay, there need not be a very detailed discussion. Could this not go back to the members of Cabinet to ask them, because they are making complete asses of themselves? Otherwise, the Seanad is just being treated with contempt. It is hardly worth coming in if, on the most serious issue...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I approve wholeheartedly of the idea behind Senator Hannigan's amendment but I am a little concerned about it. If he had stopped at humanism, I would be all right, but it goes off into what seem rather less defined areas, such as "philosophical life-stance", which could be anything. It would cover some groups I do not especially want to be covered. I would not want Scientology and my nice,...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: They should be covered by something else.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: The amendment is rather broad and will cover some fairly unsavoury things. Humanism certainly should be included because it is an ethical stance, although it is devoid of any specifically religious content. As an ethical stance, it should be protected or recognised.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: When I made my comments about cults during the debate on amendment No. 8, I had not registered that this careful limitation was proposed. I assume that some similar formula will be put before the House on Report Stage, which I will be pleased to support. A certain amount of rewording may be required but it is a useful proposal. I will support the reworded series of amendments when it comes...

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: No.

Seanad: Charities Bill 2007: Committee Stage (4 Dec 2008)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 19: In page 14, lines 22 to 29, to delete subsection (2) and substitute the following: "(2) Any default in the relationship/agreement between the Charity and the State Agency/Public body whereby the Charity would be at a loss, would not be counted as such where the Charity has little or no option but to comply with standards/practices set out by the particular body. In...