Seanad debates

Tuesday, 9 March 2010

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

1:00 am

Photo of Rónán MullenRónán Mullen (Independent)

I am disappointed with the Minister's response and although I like some of the people involved I am likewise disappointed with the response of the main Opposition party. It seems to be bad public policy to deliberately turn down an amendment that would have the effect of providing that a failure to comply with an order of the District Court would be an offence. As the Minister said on section 18 and the improvement notice, it is not just a matter of what an authorised officer may decide, it is a matter that may end up before the District Court in the event of the improvement notice being appealed to the District Court and the District Court might make an order in favour of what the authorised officer decided.

I have great difficulty with the decision to not provide that it would be an offence to fail to comply with the order. What seems to be happening reminds me of the famous phrase from scripture that the meek shall inherit the earth, but the Government's approach in this case is "the meek shall inherit the earth if that is alright with you fellows". The Government does not seem to have the courage of its convictions on the Bill if it does not require that in the event of non-compliance with an improvement notice a person would be guilty of an offence and that a District Court order should be required. On that basis I regret that the Minister will not accept the amendment.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.