Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I join other speakers in welcoming the fact the Minister has taken on board the strong message from across the House on the 21-day consultation period being inadequate. I appreciate the Minister has now accepted and agreed to a 90-day consultation period, which is a significant improvement. Government amendment No. 19 is positive in that it clarifies not simply that there will be consultation but that there will be clarity around information on by-laws and an invitation to consultation. It is positive both in terms of its communication with local authorities and in terms of its general public advertisement provision. I commend the amendment.

I wish to speak in favour of amendment No. 25, which is important. It is not simply a matter of technology but of accountability and transparency. The authorised officers who will come under this legislation will be the front line of Waterways Ireland and will implement the by-laws. It is a considerable evolution of the original points put forward by Senator Norris. He argues not that presentation would be required but for presentation on request. It is extremely reasonable where one is being told one is in breach of a by-law that one should be able to know, on request, what exact by-law that is and to see it. It is a reasonable point. We should bear in mind that in other provisions of the Bill authorised officers are being given the power to issue fixed notice fines. I urge Fianna Fáil to look at this. Perhaps the Minister will indicate that she will take it on board on Report Stage. However, I urge others to support it. Do we want a situation in which an authorised officer can say one is breaking a by-law, hand over a fine and walk away with no mechanism for appeal in place while one never sees the by-law of which one is supposedly in breach? It is a reasonable request and it is updated. It is simply a hard copy or it could be as simple as a phone. It places an onus on Waterways Ireland to provide authorised officers with the materials they need to do their jobs responsibly and appropriately.

It is a reasonable amendment to allow one to be clear. While the analogy of gardaí was used, I note that there are appeals mechanisms where one is fined by a garda. They may not be adequate and we may have had problems with their implementation but there are structures in place. With due respect to the Minister, it is not right to suggest that people who feel wrongly treated having been fined under a by-law which they have never seen should pursue redress through the courts. It is the policy of the Government as stated elsewhere on other occasions to take these kinds of tiny cases out of the courts system. We do not need someone clogging up the courts system or having to take on the cost of legal counsel simply to contest a €200 fine he or she feels was wrongly imposed. It is a simple measure. If we are introducing these powers for authorised officers and the power to introduce by-laws, the least we can provide is a simple transparency at the point of contact. It is very basic and extremely reasonable. I cannot understand why it would not be taken on board. Perhaps the Minister would like to suggest a reworded amendment and carry it through herself, but if it is opposed, I will certainly support Senator Norris should he wish to press it.