I move amendment No. 4:
In page 3, lines 17 to 35, and in page 4, lines 1 to 20, to delete paragraph (b) and substitute the following:
"(b) by insertion of the following subsection after subsection (4):
'(4A) Where the Institute has, in accordance with subsection (4) (as amended by the Radiological Protection (Amendment) Act 2002) of this section, attached a condition to a licence, the person to whom such licence has been granted shall comply with that condition.’.”.
The text of section 2(b) provides for an amendment to section 30 of the Radiological Protection Act, 1991. It was proposed to insert sections 4A and 4B so as to ensure that only practitioners meeting criteria set down by the Department of Health and Children, primarily doctors and dentists, would be licensed by the RPII to use X-ray apparatus for medical diagnostic purposes. The circumstances leading to the inclusion of this part of section 2(b) and the proposed amendment of the section are pretty complicated. I do not want to waste time with a long drawn out history of the provision, but put very simply the text was incorporated into the Bill in an effort to deal with an apparent anomaly in legislation administered by my Department and the Department of Health and Children concerning the position of chiropractors and the use of X-ray equipment. In effect, paragraphs (b) and (c) represented an interim measure pending the introduction of more comprehensive legislation by the Department of Health and Children.
Colleagues will be aware that the last time we discussed the Bill in committee in July 1999 concerns were expressed all round on behalf of the Irish Chiropractors Association which resulted in the deferral of any decision on section 2. At that time it was anticipated that chiropractors' concerns and those of the Department of Health and Children would be resolved, but these issues and concerns have proved more complicated than first advised. Whereas the provisions of section 2 seek to deal with one issue that issue is an element in broader important policy issues concerning public health, safety and the regulation of practitioners offering various forms of therapeutic treatment by persons who are not medical practitioners.
These are not issues which I, as Minister of State with responsibility for the regulation of radioactive and other dangerous substances, can resolve. By coincidence of circumstances an attempt to deal with one of them led to the deferral of the Bill in which other issues are also addressed. There is also a need to provide for a grants scheme to facilitate those whose homes are affected by undesirable levels of radon gas in order that they may undertake remediation works. For very good and sound procedural reasons I cannot bring forward details of the proposed scheme today. We cannot progress work in this important area if the Bill continues to be held up while complex issues outside our remit are being resolved elsewhere.
I am advised that the Minister for Health and Children will shortly be in a position to effect the transposition by means of regulations under the medical exposures directive. The proposed regulations will replace the Medical Ionising Radiation Regulations, 1988. In the meantime, for the reasons I have outlined, I do not propose to proceed with the original proposal contained in section 2 of the Bill to insert sections 4A and 4B into the principal Act.
My officials have been in contact with the Irish Chiropractors Association which accepts the need for us to proceed in this fashion. In the circumstances, if my amendments Nos. 4 and 12 are accepted, I assume amendments Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, and Nos. 13 to 16, inclusive, will not be proceeded with.
