Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 8, 48 to 50, inclusive, 56, 73, 76, 82, 95, 106, 107, 116, 131 and 232 are technical amendments to correct cross-references or typographical errors. That will drive the Senator mad but there it is. It has to be done. Amendment No. 8 is a technical amendment to correct an incorrect cross-reference. Amendments Nos. 48 to 50 are technical amendments to specify the cross-reference more precisely. Amendment No. 56 is a technical amendment to include the necessary cross-references to all provisions relating to offences in the Bill. Amendment No. 73 is a technical amendment to provide for the correct reference to specific provisions in the Companies Act. Amendment No. 76 is similar to amendment No. 56 and is a technical amendment to include the necessary cross-references to all provisions relating to offences in the Bill. Amendment No. 82 is a technical amendment to introduce the necessary cross-reference to the functions of a co-decision-maker as set out in section 16. Amendment No. 95 is a technical amendment that provides for the director, in reviewing a co-decision-making agreement, to check that the agreement is not null and void. Amendment No. 106 is a technical amendment to specify the correct cross-reference more precisely.It proposes that the court would make a determination pursuant to an application under subsection 4(b) which provides that the director can apply to the court to determine whether or not a person should continue to be a co-decision maker.

Amendment No. 106 is a technical amendment to specify that the application to register a co-decision-making agreement is subject to the requirement of subsection 14(6). This specifies that a co-decision-making agreement may be signed on behalf of an appointer by a third party. This is permitted where the appointer is unable to sign the agreement. However, the appointer must specify the third party who will sign on his or her behalf.

Amendment No. 107 is a technical amendment to describe more clearly the first grounds on which a complaint can be made against a co-decision maker. This is when the co-decision maker has acted or is proposing to act outside of the scope of the functions of the co-decision-making agreement and no change of policy is proposed.

Amendment No. 116 is a technical amendment to specify the cross-reference more precisely. The court will make a determination on an application by the director under subsection 2(a) where the latter believes a complaint to be well founded.

Amendment No. 131 is a technical amendment to make clear the court's determination on applications on co-decision making is limited to matters arising from this part and to co-decision making.

Amendment No. 232 clarifies that in any application to the court on an advanced healthcare directive, the applicant should inform the court of any enduring power of attorney regardless of whether it was registered under the Bill or the 1996 Act.