Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I do not wish to take up the time of the House unnecessarily. However, this is a mistake. I studied physics for many years. While all other measurements are metered, the kilogram is the only unit of measurement based on a mixture of arithium and platinum that is kept in France. It is the only unit of measurement kept in a solid physical state. It used to be based on the weight of a litre of water at sea level. Therefore, the problem with the term "weight" is that it changes. I raised this issue with the Minister of State earlier.

In 1901, to deal with the confusion caused in terms of what constituted a kilogram, the International Bureau of Weights and Measures engaged in its third significant discussion of the issue and determined that it was a unit of mass. That is the official legal position. Mass is different from weight which I could explain if I had two hours. Mass relates to matter, while weight relates to the gravitational pull required to hold something steady without it floating away. What is being inserted in the Bill, therefore, is not correct. I made a number of legal points on the amendments on the last occasion which I will not rehearse as we have a lot of business to deal with and the Minister of State is under pressure. However, there have been many tests done in this regard. It is equal to the mass of the international prototype of the kilogram. Therefore, the words it is proposed to insert do not create certainty, rather they create uncertainty. I am completely right in my argument, regardless of what the lawyer has to say about the matter. The Minister of State should ring the lawyer and ask the reason the Bill is to include the words "in weight" when a kilogram is a unit of mass. It is different from almost every other measurement.

I accept the Minister of State will not concede the point. However, this is wrong. This is the type of legislation on which the Seanad should bring its experience and knowledge to bear. If we need to ensure there is certainty in this regard, this is not the legislation in which to do so. The matter should be addressed in an interpretation Bill, of which there is a number. We have defined "a straight line", "distance" and many other terms. The last interpretation Act was passed in 2005. Where there is doubt, the matter should be addressed in interpretation legislation. The inclusion of the words "in weight" after "kilogram" is akin to including the words "in length" after "a mile". If the Minister of State will not accept my argument, as he clearly will not, perhaps he might explain what needs to be clarified to provide certainty. How do the words "in weight" provide it? What was not clear about the term "kilogram"?