Seanad debates

Thursday, 2 March 2017

Heritage Bill 2016: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

10:30 am

Photo of Alice-Mary HigginsAlice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will speak to a couple of the amendments. I realise they are complex but we are in an unfortunate situation in that the public engagement and consultation on the legislation is happening simultaneously to the legislation being before the House. I appreciate that the Minister acknowledged that she met with waterways users but the reason we have such complex amendments before the House is that they are happy for them to be inserted here. It would be much better if we were able to address a number of these concerns on which each of us has responded separately to the lobbying we received on them. Where there is any question of duplication, withdrawing some, supporting others and so forth, we are happy to make sure we can expedite that response.

I had mistakenly spoken to amendment 1h so I will not speak to it in detail again but that amendment simply ensures that Waterways Ireland is considering safety standards aboard a vessel in its deliberations. I will not reiterate the point I made earlier but someone cannot have a class of vessel that has been arbitrarily ruled out of order. It is a matter on which there are agreed safety standards and boats which meet those standards in a transparent way, adjudicated on by a qualified individual, will have the use of the canal.

Similarly, my colleague, Senator Craughwell, spoke about the question of heritage boats. Canal users have spoken to us on the question of maximum dimensions. All of those point to the same gap in the legislation. When a ruling is to be made on whether certain kinds of crafts are acceptable or not on the canal, there must be clear guidelines around that and they must have regard to heritage and existing dimension vessels. We are trying to get to the same point, and I am merely pointing to a gap in the legislation because the current power is too sweeping in terms of Waterways Ireland having the power to determine which boats should be used. I will address a couple of the other key by-laws contemplated by the section. To be clear, I am pushing. I have an amendment on the permits and licences being introduced. The House has debated what happens when rent increases, including the impact of that on people. My colleague enumerated the many people who dwell on the canal. Others make regular use of our canals for tourism and personal purposes. Amendment No. 1m proposes that the permits or licences that canal users are required to have be set at costs appropriate to the intended uses and linked to inflation. Any increase in cost should be introduced incrementally and should be subject to public consultation. This is about ensuring that the cost for those who rely on using the canal does not spike suddenly and negatively. I am open to suggestions from the Minister. I wish that this issue had been addressed in advance. If the Minister has proposals on ensuring that cost increases are made manageable, predictable and subject to consultation, I will be happy to work with her and withdraw this amendment.

We have a core problem with how fixed fines are applied, as outlined extensively by Senator Black. This is an unusual situation, in that there will be fixed payment notices that cannot be appealed and will be administered by a designated officer outside the Garda. The OPW and CIE cannot demand fixed payments. We discussed whether the Bill creates new powers. This seems to be one. If it is not, then it is certainly a power which is being applied differently and which will have an effect on people. It is a significant jump and is out of line with what we normally do in terms of fixed-payment notices. What is the justification for that?

Surely there must be an appeals mechanism. There are only a few fixed-payment fines that do not have appeals mechanisms. Appeals are used to clarify the situation or bring forward witnesses. What is the appeals mechanism in this context?

Other Senators have co-signed amendments Nos. 1n and 1s but, having reflected on the wording, I am happy to withdraw them. The core problem is the wording.

Senators Norris and Ó Domhnaill will speak to amendment No. 1k, so I will move-----

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.