In the time available to me perhaps I might address the provisions of section 4, having already addressed many other issues arising under this Bill. The point I had made in relation to this section is that it is confusing. I am really not sure what the Minister set out to achieve and should like him to answer my questions. For example, section 2 provides that the Bill replaces the common law rules, a laudable objective, because they are obscure, confused and in need of change but, unfortunately, from my reading of the Bill, the Minister replaced them with new rules which are also vague, confused and unclear. I am afraid the Minister will achieve a result diametrically opposed to the one to which he aspires. Having thrown the common law rules out the window, he is possibly allowing them in the back door. I find the section confusing but I am not a lawyer. I await clarification from the Minister.
Occupiers' Liability Bill, 1994: Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Debate adjourned.