Results 1,821-1,840 of 18,726 for speaker:Michael McDowell
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: The rule or procedure is that if it is not agreed, we deal with amendments separately.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 98:In page 34, to delete lines 25 to 28. This amendment proposes to delete lines 25 to 28, which are now comprised in subsection (4). To put this into context, subsection (4) states: "In the preparation of the statements referred to in subsection (1), the Procedures Committee shall avail itself of the advice and expertise of any consultants or advisers appointed under...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: It is very hard to understand it. It seems there is a mandatory requirement that the procedures committee avail itself of the advice and expertise of any consultants or advisers appointed under section 11(7). The committee would even be obliged to consult persons whose role is to vet District Court applications because they are so many in number. This is in relation to the committee...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: Without trespassing on the next amendment No. 98a, it addresses the "shall" and "may" issue raised by Senator Norris. Will the Minister indicate whether he will accept that amendment?
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: The problem is that-----
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: One of the problems with grouping amendments is that one finds out at the very end whether the Minister will make a particular concession.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: Is the answer "Yes" or "No" in regard to------
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: That is an improvement.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 98a:In page 34, line 26, to delete “shall” and substitute “may”.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: No, the Minister indicated that his patience will expire if I so do.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: No, it is not agreed.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: No, we will discuss them separately.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 99:In page 34, line 30, after “shall” to insert “ensure it is compliant with section 7(1) and may”. This amendment seeks to insert in page 34, line 30, after the word "shall", which has now been changed to "may", the words, "ensure it is compliant with section 7(1) and may". Section 7(1) provides that, "A decision to recommend, under this...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: The proposal is to insert into section 53(5), which states, "In the preparation of the statement referred to in subsection (1)(a)," which is a statement setting out the selection procedures, "the Procedures Committee shall, amongst other matters, have regard to", a requirement to ensure it is compliant with section 7(1) and may have regard to the critical importance of the matters listed...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I have been trying to be brief, but perhaps I should be clear about the reason for the amendment.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I can do it reasonably briefly. Section 7 is divided into two subsections, the first of which states that, "A decision to recommend, under this Act, a person for appointment to judicial office shall be based on merit." Subsection (2) states, "Subject to subsection (1), where the function, under this Act, of selecting and recommending persons for appointment to a judicial office falls to be...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: It is. I am reading from page 34.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: The objective that membership of the Judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women and the objective that it should reflect the diversity within the population as a whole are two matters to which the commission is supposed to have regard under section 7(2), but they are made, as stated in section 7(2), subject to section 7(1), namely, the requirement that appointments be made on...
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 99a:In page 34, to delete lines 35 to 38. This amendment proposes to delete lines 35 to 38 on page 34. It was submitted prior to the amendment we have just discussed. As a result, it is a bit redundant as we have already dealt with that issue.
- Seanad: Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Jun 2019)
Michael McDowell: I move amendment No. 99b:In page 34, line 35, after “judiciary” to insert “in each of the courts”. This amendment deals with the proposition that the Judiciary as a whole should-----