Building Control Bill, 1984: Committee.

Mr. Ferris

Dáil Éireann has made the following Order:

That the Building Control Bill, 1984, be referred to the Joint Committee on Legislation pursuant to paragraph (1) (e) of that Committee's Orders of Reference.

I move:

That the Building Control Bill, 1984, be referred to the Joint Committee on Legislation pursuant to paragraph (1) (e) of that Committee's Orders of Reference.

Members of the House will remember that we agreed to this proposal last week. This is an expediency motion to set up the process of referring the Building Control Bill, 1984 to the Joint Committee on Legislation in compliance with the committee's orders of reference.

Mr. Fitzsimons

This is an unusual motion. From my experience in the House I cannot recall a precedent for a Bill being discussed through to the completion of Second Stage in the other House and then come before us by way of motion, as is the case here. I made clear last week that I had a particular concern in this area. I understand that it would not be in order to discuss the Bill as we have completed that discussion but I can refer to the motion before us. I made it clear on the last occasion that I have a particular interest and concern in this area. It is a very important Bill. I am a practising architect, nominated to be a Member of this House by the Irish Architects Society; therefore I have a very particular interest in this Bill. I was very disappointed, as I made clear last week, that I did not get a proper opportunity to consult my notes. Nevertheless, it is a very important Bill and I would not want to hold it back in any way.

The Minister in his contribution did not make it clear why this procedure was being adopted in this case. I would like to ask that question of him if it is in order. I would also like to refer to paragraph (1) (e) of the order of reference of the Joint Committee on Legislation which states:

to consider any Bill referred to it by either House with the concurrence of the other;

Why was this procedure adopted in this case? The final question is in relation to paragraph (7) of the orders of reference which states:

That any Member of either House may attend and be heard in the proceedings of the Joint Committee or a sub-committee in relation to a matter comprehended by paragraph (1) (a), subject to the prior consent of the Joint Committee.

In view of my special concern in this area, will I be afforded an opportunity to appear before the joint committee with regard to any matter which I would consider important enough to raise?

Mr. O'Leary

I would like, as a member of the Joint Committee on Legislation, to remind the House that we did adopt a procedure similar to this in the case of the Bankruptcy Bill, which was hanging around for many years and which had not been dealt with by either House in Committee. It has now been dealt with fully by the joint committee. The Committee Stage in both Houses has been completed and the Report Stage is now before the Dáil; it will come back to us for Report Stage later. The system worked very well. In extremely technical matters, even in matters of more widespread interest than building regulations but not necessarily of more importance, the Committee Stage of Bills in this House is becoming the preserve of one or two people. I do not think that is good. The House should not get into a situation where, for long periods of time it is meeting in public, it should only be the preserve of one or two people. Very technical legislation seems to accentuate that problem. I am in favour of very technical legislation such as this and perhaps the Companies (Amendment) Bill — the Bankruptcy Bill was a good example of it — being sent to Joint Committees for examination by them.

While obviously I cannot commit the Joint Committee to anything, I know that the attitude of the members of that committee is at all times to let all Members of the House participate fully in their discussion. For example, while the Bankruptcy Bill was being discussed, facilities were made available to enable the Opposition spokesman on justice — who was not a member of the joint committee — to have the right of audience on the joint committee and its committees, including the committee considering bankruptcy. That was done and it worked very satisfactorily indeed. I do not think there is any problem in getting the kind of facilities the Senator requires.

The Senator will be aware that it was the intention of all parties in this House that the membership of a joint committee should not be permanent. It was specifically the intention that when a Bill of a particular importance and of technical detail was being considered by a joint committee the membership of the committee representative of a party should be changed to reflect that fact. I have no doubt that full participation other than voting participation will be available to any Member of the House who wants to exercise it. In addition to that, most Members will in respect of a non-controversial committee like a Committee on Legislation be able to arrange a transfer with another committee, should they require to get more involved, including the right to vote. I do not think any Member should have a difficulty in that regard. It is sensible, to use the Joint Committee on Legislation for exercises like this and it worked very well in the area of bankruptcy where no progress had been made for over 20 years. For all these reasons the decision to refer this Bill to the joint committee, as proposed in the motion is one which I support.

Mr. M. O'Toole

I want to support Senator Fitzsimons in connection with obtaining some guidance from the Leader of the House with regard to the referring of this Bill to the Joint Committee on Legislation. I have a different view to Senator O'Leary's regarding that committee. It is a talking shop. We recently brought it to the notice of the Minister that under the terms of reference we cannot make any recommendations to the Minister. We have a very able committee who have heard submissions on various Bills but in the final analysis we are unable to take decisions and make recommendations to the Minister. While it may be that the Committee Stage of any Bill in this House is the preserve of a few, if we had a widespread Committee debate our productivity in this House would be nil. The productivity in the Joint Committee on Legislation is nil. We listen to submissions from the bodies concerned with the legislation that is going through the House but at no time are we allowed to make recommendations of any sort to the Minister. Until the terms of reference are changed, I cannot see any reason for referring this legislation to that committee. It is only a delaying tactic, in my view. It will stagnate for months during the Recess. About this time next year it may surface again.

I would share the views of Senator Fitzsimons. Of course, he has the right to attend the Joint Committee on Legislation and make his submissions in the same way as any group or individuals who request to be heard. The committee has no productivity and no right to make recommendations.

Mr. Lanigan

I did not intend to speak on this motion but the area has been broadened sufficiently to suggest that the Committee Stage of Bills in this House would be done away with, that the joint committees would take over the Committee Stage of Bills and that we would go directly from Second Stage in the Houses to Report Stage. When this was agreed by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges in both Houses the implications were not adequately addressed. It would be wrong if Committee Stage was given over to a committee. It is a committee of the House, but it is not the House. All Members of this House should have the right to address themselves to the Minister on Committee Stage.

Senator O'Leary said that of course the spokesperson for each group would have the right to attend and speak at these joint committees but that is limiting the rights of the Senators. It is not alone the spokespeople for a particular grouping who would generally have an interest in a Bill. For instance in the case of the Building Control Bill it would mean that Senator Fitzsimons would not have the right, because he is not the spokesman on that matter, to go into the joint committee, to address it, to query the Minister or to vote in that committee. Doing what is proposed here would mean a diminution of the rights of Senators and of the control of this House in dealing with Bills. I sincerely hope we will get an adequate reply from the Leader of the House. If we do not get an adequate reply, we cannot accept this message from the Dáil.

Mr. Ferris

I have listened with interest to all the contributions on this motion. The motion reflects the decision of last week's sitting of the Seanad and the resolution which was passed by the Dáil. When we discussed this last week we dealt in detail with the problems that had been raised. Senator Fitzsimons expressed his reservations. At the winding up of that decision last week I clarified the matter for the benefit of Senator Fitzsimons. I said that because he had a special interest and expertise in this area I hoped he would be afforded every opportunity to make a submission and contribution in the Joint Committee on Legislation when they are dealing with the Committee Stage of this Bill. The Cathaoirleach intimated that it was a matter for the committee. We were at one in suggesting that Senator Fitzsimons, and indeed any other Member who has a special interest, would be facilitated by the Oireachtas Joint Committee in receiving submissions, in listening to submissions and allowing Members to make a full contribution. I do not share the comments of Senator O'Toole that the Joint Committee on Legislation is just a talking shop. It has a specific statutory role to fulfil under the Standing Orders of this House and the other House. This Bill is not just something for the convenience of the Minister. This is a Bill from the Houses of the Oireachtas, being referred to a Joint Committee to discuss the Committee Stage of the Bill because it is highly technical. I understand that last week it was agreed that the sections that were worrying people were so technical it would need a special sitting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Legislation to deal with the technicalities of the Bill. The Bill, as I understand it, will come back from that committee amended and it will come before this House for Report Stage. Members will be afforded an opportunity to further amend it then if they so wish.

The Building Control Bill, 1984 has lain dormant for some years because it had not addressed itself to the problem of the amendments that were required on Committee Stage. The other House wisely decided on this occasion that this Bill needed that action to be taken. Other than that, I share all the views of the other Members of the House on both sides that I would not like to see this as a precedent for legislation generally. This House has addressed itself adequately and diligently at all Stages of legislation. It has proved over the last three months that it is a House worthy of note and certainly much more worthy of recognition than it gets from many quarters. We have done some excellent work. We have changed Bills radically, dramatically and correctly. We have changed Bills that have come from the other House in areas where we considered it necessary. As Deputy Leader of the House I defend the right of this House to do so. I hope when this section of the Bill comes back from the Joint Committee on Legislation it will be subject to our final perusal on Report Stage. I hope that agreement can be reached. We agreed last week and this is a final, formal technical step to set up this motion so that it can be referred to the committee.

May I assure the House of the Minister's statement last week, that although the Houses of the Oireachtas are in recess for the summer the committees of the House are not. The committee dealing with this legislation will be dealing with it through the summer months. That is what I understood last week from the Minister and I just want to put it on the record of the House in case anyone may think that matter will lie dormant for another 12 months. There would be no useful purpose served by that. I am looking forward to this coming back to the House in its amended form so that we can continue our discussions on it.

You are suggesting it comes back in amended form, that the experts will have their say, that the members of the joint committee will judge what has been said by the experts and that no other Senator will have a right to speak, to comment or to ask questions of a Minister on Committee Stage.

Seanad Éireann debate - Tuesday, 8 Jul 1986

Building Control Bill, 1984: Committee.

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 8 Jul 1986