I am surprised that amendment No. 7 has been tabled. Section 2(1)(c) places a requirement on a carrier to ensure the non-national has the proper documentation – a valid passport or other valid document that establishes his or her nationality and identity and, if required, a valid visa or transit visa. All that is required of the carrier is that he or she carries out rudimentary checks of a passenger's documents to ensure they are in order. Nothing more than this is necessary or required by the Bill. Carrier staff will be helped, as some are at present, through training and advice given by immigration officers to spot the more obvious forgeries and falsifications. It is, basically, a mechanical task. If an intending passenger presents with insufficient documentation at a port of embarkation for Ireland, it is no different than if he or she turned up with insufficient money for the fare. All the carrier needs to do is say, "You cannot travel with me today." If amendment No.7 was accepted, further responsibilities would be thrust on the carrier to make more personal and detailed inquiries of the intending passenger by asking such questions as, "Do you intend to seek asylum?" Amendment No. 8 would go even further requiring the carrier to inquire deeply into the motivation of the intending passenger and his or her reasons for travel and not having a visa.