Seanad debates

Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Rónán MullenRónán Mullen (Independent)

He is substantially correct and his argument on the need for independent regulation was well made. I support his comments in the context of the media because it is a position to which I too strongly adhere.

However, despite what I have said previously, I found Senator Cummins's argument very persuasive. I wonder if a via media could be found. While I have not studied the relevant section in detail, surely it is possible to craft a solution whereby hunt clubs are not exempt for all the reasons expressed by Senator Norris and others while holding open the option of deciding against publication where a reasonable case can be made. The qui timor concept could apply where people fear a certain consequence. It is not a strong argument that we should not worry about a marginal group. Anything that could be a potential source of concern ought to be taken seriously given that the precedent exists for awful behaviour by so-called animal rights activists in other jurisdictions. Surely it is possible for the Government to consider, and hopefully bring before the House on Report Stage, an amendment which allows the Minister to withhold publication of the names of certain bodies while at the same time maintaining the register and requiring the inclusion of hunt clubs. This might allay concerns about the possible misuse of information for intimidation or other purposes.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.