McCartan, Patrick

Wednesday, 19 June 1991

Dáil Éireann Debate
Vol. 409 No. 10

First Page Previous Page Page of 86 Next Page Last Page

Select Committee on Crime: Motion.

Whenever we see it.More Button

Rubbish.More Button

The first point that has to be made on the motion before the House this morning is in regard to the long delay that has taken place in bringing before the House this motion for the establishment of a ...More Button

Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Bill, 1990 [ Seanad ]: Committee Stage.

The section is straightforward. However, an amendment in my name was ruled out of order by the office of the Ceann Comhairle. I am clearly bound by that ruling and I am not in a position to move the ...More Button

I fully accept the ruling of the Ceann Comhairle.More Button

I am not moving the amendment. I am speaking to the section. The succinct point made by the Law Society which was circulated to me by letter of 29 January and, I presume, to all Deputies of the Hous...More Button

I want to respond briefly to the Minister's response to the points raised by Deputies on this side of the House. Amendment No. 1, which I tabled as long ago as 7 March and which sought to extend the ...More Button

I move amendment No. 4: In page 2, subsection (1), line 21, to delete “the following facts” and substitute “all of the following facts where relevant”. This is merely a drafting amendment to tidy up ...More Button

If the Minister says it is almost superfluous, he might accept it since it does not take from or add to the section. Paragraph (e) might on occasion give rise to some debate as to the matter of avoid...More Button

I equally regret the attitude of the Minister but it is not a matter that should divide the House. In view of the obdurate stubbornness of the Minister, I will not press my amendment. Amendment, by l...More Button

I move amendment No. 5: In page 3, subsection (2), lines 5 to 7, to delete paragraph (b). My proposition is that we delete in its entirety this paragraph (b) of subsection (2) which states: from fact...More Button

I thank the Minister for his response, considered as it was, but I would like to pursue this matter a little more. He represents the provisions in the section as providing protection for the plaintif...More Button

I listened carefully to the Minister who advanced the case that these provisions are eminently fair and should stand. They would be eminently fair if we lived in a society which enjoyed the services ...More Button

Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Defences Forces Administrative Structure.

This is one of the most central and important recommendations of the Gleeson report, highlighting the irritation on both sides caused by the fact that civil servants in the Department are watching adm...More Button

Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Bill, 1990 [ Seanad ]: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Before reporting progress I had signalled that I had taken an opposite view to the Minister of State with respect to the provisions under section 2 (2) of the Bill as circulated. He believed they rep...More Button

In view of the will of the House in respect of amendment No. 5, as amendment No. 6 is related I do not propose to press it. Amendment No. 6 not moved. Question proposed: “That section 2 stand part of ...More Button

A number of amendments to this section were put down by Fine Gael — Deputy Barrett's and Deputy Cotter's amendment in respect of latent defects — and by the Labour Party — Deputy Bell's amendment with...More Button

I will let matters rest for the moment.More Button

I move amendment No. 7: In page 3, subsection (3), line 35, to delete “two” and substitute “three”.More Button

Do not blame me for the restrictions in the Bill.More Button

I will certainly consider any reasonable proposition put to me by the Minister of State. I am not entirely convinced with the arguments he has advanced. I know I have interjected on this issue but I...More Button

I should like to clarify Deputy Barrett's remarks. I certainly did not wish to give the impression that the whole trade had to be reined in. I am concerned about people in the trade who, through mis...More Button

Ten years is a considerable period and I cannot remember what I was doing ten years ago. I was a long way from thinking that I would be addressing this House as a legislator.More Button

Let us have regard to that momentous change in circumstances and realise that it is now time to look at the specific provisions of the 1980 Act. We must realise that times and attitudes have changed. ...More Button

It is as old as where it originated from.More Button

It is time to move on.More Button

I ask the Minister to very briefly address this section which deals with limitations of actions. Subsection (1) refers to “personal injuries to a person caused by negligence, nuisance or beach of dut...More Button

I move amendment No. 9: In page 4, subsection (1), line 21, after “right” to insert “first”. More Button

I am happy to do so. There is no credit due to me at all on this issue.More Button

I am happy with that proposal. I move amendment No. 10: In page 4, subsection (1), lines 25 and 26, to delete “, but section 49 (1) (c) of the principal Act shall apply accordingly”. Again I would cl...More Button

I am a little disappointed at the Minister's response. The reason I pursued the amendment in the first place is that legislation should work from the point of view of the litigant “consumer”. Legisla...More Button

I move amendment No. 14:More Button

I accept the Minister's explanation and will not pursue the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed: “That section 6 stand part of the Bill”.More Button

The Law Society posits a reasonable query in respect of subsection (4) where they say they are at a loss to understand in what circumstances this might apply. I am somewhat at a loss too, and so that...More Button

I commend the decision of the Minister to include this provision in the legislation. I do not accept the view of the Law Society that this will inevitably prove to be the tip of the iceberg. It will...More Button

Criminal Damage Bill, 1990: Committee Stage (Resumed).

As this is important legislation touching on an area of great importance, that of combatting crime, there should be a quorum in the House to listen. Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; Hous...More Button

Only for personal injuries.More Button

The Minister for Justice's concept of the new Irish society which he told us about this morning is slowly coming asunder in the hands of the Minister of State. The Minister for Justice did not take t...More Button

He should be intending to cause the damage.More Button

The criterion the Minister talked about, intention to cause the damage, enables the uninsured driver or the unauthorised taker to argue strongly in the court that while he caused an accident he did no...More Button

The Minister seeks to add further ground to his cause of defending the indefensible. He says the proposed amendment is outside the scope of the Bill. The Title of the Bill reads: “An Act to amend th...More Button

And he does not let go too easily. He addresses his obduracy with good grace, nevertheless he holds on with a firm grip.More Button

I move amendment No. 4: In page 5, before section 3, to insert the following new section: “3.—Any offence charged under this Act shall not be a scheduled offence for the purposes of the Offences Agai...More Button

You could amend the Act.More Button

I fully accept that it is a very important issue. It is one I will be pursuing to a vote unless I can persuade the Minister of State to change his mind, or if I cannot extract from him some clear ind...More Button

As it is of fundamental importance I ask that the question be put. Amendment put. The Committee divided: Tá, 18; Níl, 65. TáMore Button

Private Members' Business. Financing of Local Authorities: Motion (Resumed).

Only 36 Members of Fine Gael voted.More Button

Criminal Damage Bill, 1990: Committee Stage (Resumed).

I move amendment No. 5: In page 5, before section 3, to insert the following new section: “3.—(1) In any case under this Act, where the extent of the damage alleged exceeds £100, the accused person s...More Button

I do not wish to withdraw the amendment for the moment. I am glad the Minister referred to the seminal case of The State (McEvitt) v. Delap. I was the solicitor who acted for Mr. McEvitt and two othe...More Button

I did not make that case. I am using the formula that has existed heretofore of a monetary limit.More Button

That is ridiculous. I do not believe this. Is that the stage we have reached?More Button

This is extremely worrying. The more I listened to the Minister the more I felt he should take this matter back for reflection before Report Stage. I want to get one point out of the way: it is a f...More Button

I am sorry I cannot allay those fears. Though there is a recommendation to that effect in the Law Reform Commission report, it does not satisfy me and I say this in all seriousness as a practitioner ...More Button

Let us make it £200.More Button

I will settle for £300.More Button

The figure could be £500.More Button

I thank the Minister of State for agreeing to consider the matter. I hope, in the intervening period, that those who practise the law in this area — and who have more up-to-date views on it than I do ...More Button

I move amendment No. 6a: In page 8, subsection (1), line 2, after “instead of” to insert “imposing a term of imprisonment or detention,”. This is a very important section containing the general provi...More Button

I would like to respond briefly to some of the points that have been made both by Deputy Barrett and the Minister. They do not necessarily take me by surprise. At some stage we will have to bite the...More Button

It was not Islington although it was not far from it. It may well be that the pilot scheme was subsequently extended to include Islington. I think Newham is the name of the district I am trying to t...More Button

I am. Amendment put and declared lost.More Button

It is a sensible amendment. I support the idea in principle and I will be glad if the Minister comes up with a formula that would allow the District Court to keep abreast of changes in jurisdiction a...More Button

Written Answers. - Defence Forces Disciplinary Measures.

Asked the minister: the number of occasions on which sanctions were imposed by commanding officers on soldiers arising out of alleged breaches of regulations and directly related to efforts on the part of personnel to es...More Button

Written Answers. - Good Conduct Medal Replacement.

Asked the minister: if a replacement award for the good conduct medal is under examination; when it will be finalised; if it will include a reference to the Nobel Award to UN peacekeeping forces; and if he will make a st...More Button

Written Answers. - Army Catering Boards Employees.

Asked the minister: if he will take steps to equalise retirement provisions for people, who worked as employees of catering boards in Army installations to those employed on similar duties directly by the Defence Forces;...More Button

Last Updated: 23/05/2011 02:13:48 First Page Previous Page Page of 86 Next Page Last Page