It may be remembered that certain suggestions were thrown out in connection with this Bill on the Report Stage when it was last before the House which the Minister asked time to consider. I think Senator Jackson is interested in this.
LIFFEY HYDRO-ELECTRIC SCHEME. - OIL IN NAVIGABLE WATERS BILL, 1925—REPORT.
CATHAOIRLEACH
I moved amendment 1 that the word "construed" be substituted for "constructed." I also raised the question that some of the clauses were involved. In one case the Bill was limited to vessels carrying 25 tons, and in another portion it mentioned "any vessel." I then mentioned that a vessel carrying 15 or 20 tons would do as great an amount of injury as a vessel carrying over 25 tons. We have also other objections to the Bill. We think it would be much better if it were mandatory on the local authorities to take action. In some cases it mentions the Harbour Board, and in others the local or sanitary authority, and if it would be possible to introduce a section to make it mandatory on local authorities, and to make a harbour board where one was established the authority that should take action. It also seems rather objectionable that the harbour authorities have to make representation to the Minister, who may appoint some person to interfere where the law is broken. It seems to me that that would involve a good deal of delay, and if power were given to the harbour or local authority to take action itself it would be better. A vessel that had done a lot of damage might possibly be out of the port before the Minister had sent a representative to inspect it.
CATHAOIRLEACH
The point on which the debate was adjourned the last day was in reference to the difficulty raised in regard to an amendment to Section 2. Senator Jackson then said that section 2 read at present "twenty-five tons of oil at one time," and that in other sections it read "any vessel." He suggested that that portion in reference to the twenty-five tons of oil should be deleted. It was in reference to that suggestion that the Minister said he would like to look more fully into the Bill. Perhaps if the Senator would let the Fourth Stage remain over it would be the best thing to do. At the time the Minister thanked Senator Jackson for drawing his attention to these two matters. The Minister is not here to-day.
The section I was concerned about is Section 8. My point was that the harbour authorities should be the ones to institute proceedings at once, if it was to be effective.
CATHAOIRLEACH
I think if you were good enough to table any particular amendments that occured to you it would be the best way. We will submit them to the Minister, and ask him to be in attendance at the next sitting, and we will hear what he has to say. I think that is the safest way, as there is no hurry about the Bill.
Consideration adjourned until February 10th.