Joe O'Toole (Independent)

The example offered by the Minister was discussed at some length last week and I do not agree with it. The person whose name is on the application is the one to whom we are relating. I do, however, see the point the Minister raised in the earlier part of the argument. I can see that having a triple interpretation of the word "person" could cause confusion which was not my intention. I do not fully understand the legal implications beyond this. I was aware of the 1937 Act and of the view the amendment supported what was contained in it. What the Minister has said has created confusion about this interpretation. He has clearly stated this is the Attorney General's position against whom I will not pit myself on legal issues. I reluctantly accept there is a significant intellectual legal argument against accepting the amendment and that I will have to consider my position on it.