Results 1,581-1,600 of 1,714 for speaker:John Dardis

Seanad: Health Services: Motion. (26 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I formally second the motion and reserve the right to speak later.

Seanad: Health Services: Motion. (26 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: We must not talk about Senator Feighan's age. It is not allowed.

Seanad: Health Services: Motion. (26 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: The Senator should try getting sick in Italy.

Seanad: Health Services: Motion. (26 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I thank the Minister, Deputy Martin, who spent considerable time in the House earlier today dealing with legislation and has remained here for virtually the entire debate. I acknowledge that as a measure of his commitment. The Minister recognised that some significant concerns remain. Listening to what the Opposition had to say, one would get the impression that it is entirely wrong to...

Seanad: Health Services: Motion. (26 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: Several Senators began by stating they were members of a health board and then went on to defend the system. I am not saying that there have not been good people or that the politicians do not do their very best for the people in their area. They do, but the local interests are dominant. Unless it is treated on a national basis or on a regional basis, I cannot see where the advances will...

Seanad: Order of Business. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: We will orchestrate something.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: It is known as recycling. Question put and agreed to. Section 6 agreed to. SECTION 7.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I raised this issue on Second Stage. I cannot agree with Senator Bannon. We have to have regard to cost. The original BATNEEC referred to "not excessive costs", which was used as an opt-out, certainly by local authorities at some points. I refer, for example, to the pollution of the River Liffey by sewage treatment plants. That reference was used as a type of refuge or an excuse for not doing...

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: Leaving aside the cost aspect, one of the effects of amendment No. 4 would be to remove the obligation to use technology regardless of whether the techniques are used or produced within the State. That is an important statement—

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: —because it could be used as a refuge or an opt-out in that people would say if it is not available within the State, they should not have to use it. That should not be the case.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I sympathise with what Senator Bannon is trying to achieve, which is an objective shared by the Minister. However, the effect of adopting the amendment would be to reduce the standard rather than increase it. The Bill mentions effluents but it does not specify whether they are hazardous or not. If one adopted the "hazardous" approach one could have a situation where something was not...

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: The intention is laudable. It would be desirable that other local authority areas would be cognisant of the potential for pollution that might impinge on them but there would be a huge knock-on effect if the amendment was accepted. It could logically be argued that if a person was applying for planning permission for a house bordering a neighbouring local authority area, there would be an...

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: People should have to state reasons for their decisions, whether such decisions are by a bank or a local authority or other body. I believe I am correct in stating that recent planning and development legislation requires An Bord Pleanála to give reasons for its decisions. In the interests of consistency, it is desirable that some provision of that nature should be included in the Bill.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: It is covered by the 1937 Act.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I am sure the Minister will correct me if I am wrong, but if we were to exclude "all persons for the time being", a person, for example, who leased a facility as an operator but was not its owner would be exempt.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: I can think of one example of which I have experience. A succession of attempts was made by the EPA and the local authority to try to control a certain activity that was taking place – to the extent of going to the High Court – but the limitations of the legal system were evident in terms of the person's being able to continue the activity. If the Senator's proposed words were added it...

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: This Act is no different from any other legislation in that, if someone commits an offence, it is open to the authorities to seek their extradition, if that is what is required. I do not see the distinction between this Bill and any other. If people break the law they are subject to the relevant penalties, irrespective of the nature of the applicable legislation. Section 94 refers to the fact...

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: The new section 94 explicitly states what the transferee must do and what sort of person he or she must be.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: We cannot make the criminal law in this legislation. If we want to update the criminal law, we must do so in the appropriate legislation, rather than here.

Seanad: Protection of the Environment Bill 2003: Committee Stage. (25 Feb 2003)

John Dardis: This is quite a good amendment and would make the system a lot more flexible. It would help to dispose more quickly of a number of cases.