Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I would like to make the same case as has been made regarding the insertion of "Class A". The Minister's reasoning for not mentioning "Class A" in the Bill was that this might not be the term used in ten or 20 years time when the legislation would still operate. However, I believe to do so would put at rest the minds of those with concerns.

Section 46(3)(a) reads:

This subsection applies to a person who —

(a) satisfies the Council that he or she has the requisite knowledge and skill for the purposes of subsection (2),

My amendment No. 17 would replace this with "has undergone courses of training and education, and acquired educational qualifications prescribed under section 65,". The subsection as drafted is too vague and needs to be more specific. The vagueness of "satisfies the Council" is not nearly as clear as the form of words I have suggested. A strong case can be made for this amendment, as it would satisfy those who are concerned that at some point in the future someone with lesser qualifications might be accepted.