Dominic Hannigan (Labour)

I welcome the Minister of State. I also welcome this rather curious legislation which essentially clears out many thousands of private statutes and local and personal Acts that have fallen into obsolescence and irrelevance during the years. It is an extraordinarily diligent piece of work to have to go through in excess of 10,700 Acts. I compliment the Attorney General and his staff on the work done. I also congratulate Dr. Richard Humphreys who is present in the Visitors Gallery on the effort he has put in and what he has achieved in the legislation.

As the Minister of State pointed out, this is another stage in the work that began with the Statute Law Revision Act 2007, dealing with public Acts. The body of legislation before us today includes private, local or personal Acts, which are not really a feature of our system nowadays. It is a reflection of the evolution of our parliamentary system and governance generally that a great deal of regulation that used to be engaged in directly by Parliament in earlier times is now exercised by a host of other agencies. This is the case with, for example, company registration and the naturalisation of foreigners. I note that one such Act dating from 1726 dealt with the naturalisation of a certain George Frederick Handel. Even the marriage of certain citizens and making children legitimate are matters included in previous Acts.

The statutes being repealed relate to a period well before we attained our independence. It is interesting to look at the long list involved because it gives a sense of the social and economic life at the time the measures were enacted. For example, one Act relates to "Weirs upon the Boyne", which was passed in 1537. Another Act dating from 1569 deals with "Uniting of the See of Clonvicknoishe with the See of Meath". Another Act from 1747 dissolved the marriage of Georges Lowther, Esq., of County Meath with Judith Usher to enable them to marry again. I spotted also an intriguing enactment from 1662 providing for the raising of £30,000 for the use of the Duke of Ormond. We would never imagine now that a politician or public figure would have a Bill drawn up specifically to allow him or her to raise a bit of money. That would never happen these days, or perhaps it is best not to go there.

Our Cork colleagues will note with interest a 1703 enactment which provided for cleaning of the channel of the harbour of Cork, and may wonder why the Attorney General feels so confident in repealing a measure for which there may after all be some continuing necessity. Perhaps Senator Boyle will address that.

Colleagues may amuse themselves by looking down through the lists set out in the Schedules, which really give one a flavour of the times and a sense of what preoccupied people in times past. However, is does occur to one while reading the material that the laws were largely for one class, the landed gentry. Presumably these were people who could afford to have laws introduced in Parliament to address their concerns and problems. We have moved on somewhat from those times and most people would be surprised at the notion of a person's private issues appearing on the Order Paper for any Parliament in a modern democracy. It would be anathema to our idea of what a Parliament should be.

One could also argue that the rich and powerful nowadays have a more sophisticated way of achieving their objectives. They do not need private Acts of Parliament to get their way. Events of recent years in which some public representatives allowed themselves to be used and corrupted by private interests spring to mind. It could be argued that yesterday's budget, or the NAMA bailout, while ostensibly being in the common good, are in reality measures in the interests of a relatively small but highly influential section of our society.

I have no difficulty in welcoming this Bill on behalf of the Labour Party. It will make life much easier for people who are unsure whether certain rather ancient Acts still have legal effect. It will simplify things for lawyers and may even mean we need fewer of them. I commend the people involved for going through all the relevant material in such a careful and scholarly manner. I will be supporting this Bill.