Seanad debates

Wednesday, 13 March 2019

Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2019: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

11:30 am

Photo of Simon CoveneySimon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Before I address the amendment, I will address that point because Deputy Howlin raised it with me on Second and Committee Stages. We asked the hard questions on that. This comes back to what this legislation is doing. It is not about empowering Ministers to introduce new legislation in new areas of policy. It is about effectively protecting existing arrangements and rights. As a result of that, this is not giving a delegated power to a Minister to introduce legislation in new areas without recourse to the Oireachtas. Instead, it is about giving a Minister power - in the case of health, for example, where there are a lot of delegated powers - to maintain the existing level of services, whether this is cross-Border healthcare or whatever. Deputy Howlin was correct to raise those issues and to test them legally. They are issues the Attorney General gave us advice on and we are comfortable legally with that.

On the amendment itself, I thank Senators Kelleher, Ruane, Dolan, Black, Grace O'Sullivan and, in particular, Senator Higgins, to whom I have spoken about this amendment and her concerns around it, for their constructive engagement on a post-enactment scrutiny both today and throughout the legislative process, more broadly. Although I am not in a position to support the amendment as tabled, I agree with the purpose of the amendment and the motivation behind it. We fully agree that given the emergency nature of the legislation, a period for reflection and review of the legislation, if enacted and commenced, would be appropriate and useful. However, rather than a specific legislative measure, such as the amendment as tabled, it is our intention to provide the review mechanisms under Dáil Standing Order 164A and Seanad Standing Order 168, which read as follows: "Twelve months following the enactment of a Bill, save in the case of the Finance Bill and the Appropriation Bill, the member of the Government or Minister of State who is officially responsible for implementation of the Act shall provide a report which shall review the functioning of the Act and which shall be laid in the Parliamentary Library." It is envisaged that it would be the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence that would consider the post-enactment report on the Bill.

In addition, each of my Cabinet colleagues is committed to ongoing engagement on the nuts and bolts impacts of the measures of their Parts of the Bill, with their respective committees. This would, therefore, provide the opportunity to identify and address any teething problems with and-or any unforeseen effects of the Bill. In other words, because this is emergency legislation, we have to be extra cautious afterwards that we follow through on ensuring that what we are trying to do here is what has resulted from the effect of the Bill itself. We may have to amend the legislation if we have missed something. It is unusual because of the number of Ministers and Government Departments who are all involved in one Bill. On the commencement orders for those individual Parts, it is up to the individual Ministers to commence different Parts of the Bill, once it is approved by the President, and becomes law.

For all of those reasons and while I accept the spirit of the amendment to which we are responding quite comprehensively - we have given Senator Higgins quite a lot of detail in response to her concerns, which I believe she accepts - I cannot accept it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.