Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

A number of concerns have been expressed about this provision which is designed to enable the Minister of the day, if necessary, to make regulations to deal with specific situations which may arise. It is a permissive provision which does not have to be activated unless required. Formal consultation with the Veterinary Council is required before any regulation is made. The Oireachtas may annul any regulation in accordance with standard procedures.

I note there is a particular concern about including the administration of anaesthetics in this provision and Senator Henry has tabled an amendment to replace this with a more general form of words. While I can agree to the deletion of the reference to anaesthetics, on the advice of the Attorney General I cannot accept the second element of the Senator's amendment as it is too broad. Nonetheless, in removing the reference to anaesthetics I am going a long way to meet the essence of the concerns being expressed. Consequential cross-referencing amendments arise in subsections (3) and (4).

Senator McCarthy has sought the deletion of section 60. I would point out that it offers an important safeguard by enabling a Minister in the future to intervene to curb any systematic abuse which may become apparent under the emergency provisions of section 56(2). I believe that the provision which is permissive should be retained with the amendment I have outlined and, consequently, I cannot accept his amendment.

Senator Coonan has proposed, by means of two amendments, to limit the regulation making power under this section to class A diseases. In regard to the amendments tabled to section 66, it is not appropriate to link emergencies with class A diseases, not least because if we were to do so, we could leave out injuries entirely. Therefore, I am not in a position to accept amendments Nos. 67 and 72.