Before Committee Stage commences I want to point out to Senators that I have exercised my discretion to allow the additional Government amendments on short notice on the grounds that I understand that it is intended to take the remaining Stages of the Bill today. However, as a general rule the Chair feels it is not in the interests of the orderly conduct of debate in the House nor is it fair to other Members to have to accept late amendments. I want to make that point for the record of the House so that the normal requirement of two days' notice will be observed in the future. In addition, I want to bring to the notice of Members that there is a printing error in amendment No. 4 in the printed list of amendments. In the last line of paragraph (a) subsection (ii) "been fixed" should read "been so fixed".
Air Navigation and Transport Bill 1987: Committee and Final Stages.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. a1 and b1 on the additional list of Government amendments are related and may be discussed together.
Government amendment No. a1:
In page 7, line 8, after "so to do," to insert the following:
"or that the licence or authorisation granted under the Acts in relation to an aerodrome is deemed to have been revoked pursuant to section 10 (3),".
These two amendments are designed to meet the case made by Senator O'Toole on Second Stage that aircraft operators should not be penalised for flying into or from an aerodrome without being aware that the licence or authorisation for the aerodrome is deemed to have been revoked under section 10 (3) of the Bill, with the lapse of the aerodrome's insurance cover. These amendments are proposed for acceptance in lieu of his amendment to section 10. The first amendment does so by extending the power of the Minister for Tourism and Transport under section 9 of the Bill to prohibit by notice in writing aircraft from landing at or departing from aerodromes in certain conditions and to prohibit also aircraft landing at or departing from an uninsured area. This amendment will ensure that all aircraft operators are put on notice not to fly to or from uninsured aerodromes and any breach of that prohibition would be an offence punishable by the substantial penalties provided for in section 27 of the Bill up to the following maxima:
(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or,...
(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding £50,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years,...
I should also say that the actual fine to be imposed in any case, would be for the court to decide subject to these maxima. The second amendment is consequential on the first one.
Every time I stand up to compliment a Minister in this House the press leave whether deliberately or not I do not know. It is a rare enough occurrence. In the sense of making the legislative process work it certainly is appreciated that the Minister can with such aplomb and confidence take on board the ideas put forward by people who are not from his own party. I am very grateful that this point has been taken by the Minister and has now been written into the Bill. It certainly strengthens the legislation and I have no hesitation whatsoever in not moving my amendment to section 10.
Acting Chairman
Government amendment No. 1a, and amendment No. 2 are alternatives and may be discussed together. If Government amendment No. 1a is accepted, amendment No. 2 cannot be moved.
Government amendment No. 1a:
In page 11, line 28, to delete "the proceedings" and substitute "the whole of the proceedings, or such part thereof as the Court considers appropriate,"
I have not got a copy of Government amendment No. 1a.
I acknowledge Senator O'Toole's amendment. We accept the amendment in principle but we are proposing that the wording should be that little different. We are proposing in page 11, line 28, to delete "the proceedings" and substitute "the whole of the proceedings, or such part thereof as the Court considers appropriate". We have the benefit of the parliamentary drafts people and that is why it is proposed for acceptance in that format in lieu of Senator O'Toole's amendment but it meets the same point. He made the point on Second Stage that the Court should have power to hear only part of the proceedings in camera if it considers it appropriate to do so. The proposed amendment makes it abundantly clear that the Court may hear only part or the whole of the proceedings in camera, as was intended.
I thank the Minister for accepting my viewpoint in this amendment. It is quite a simple one and I accept also that the new drafting is stronger than my own. It leaves it without doubt, and it re-emphasises the fact. It is important in investigations into aircraft tragedies or accidents that we do not scare the nation by publishing everything. At other times it is in the national interest that certain bits of information should come to light in the interests of future safety and that the Court should have the authority to say they want one section to be held in private and another in public.
I support the Government's amendment.
Acting Chairman
Government amendments Nos. 2a and 2b are related and may be discussed together.
Government amendment No. 2a:
In page 14, line 38, to delete ",30, 40 or 41" and substitute "or 30".
These are drafting amendments. The reference to sections 40 and 41 of the Bill should appear in section 27 (2) and not 27 (1). Sections 40 and 41 of the Bill create the offences of impersonating an authorised officer or an authorised person and giving false alarms. Therefore, sections 40 and 41 should be listed in section 27 (2) of the Bill which prescribes penalties for certain offences. However, sections 40 and 41 were inadvertently listed in section 27 (1) which creates certain offences and prescribes penalties therefor. I commend these amendments to the House. As I have already indicated they are technical drafting amendments.
This amendment is put down to correct a wrong reference in the section. The wrong reference arose because of the deletion of the original First Schedule in the drafting of the Bill. The 1975 Protocols of the Warsaw Convention to which sections 32 to 35 of the Bill relate are contained in the First Schedule to the Bill. The Second Schedule lists statutory provisions being repealed by the Bill. In effect, this is simply to correct a wrong reference in the section.
The purpose of this amendment is to make clear provision for converting liability limits expressed in Special Drawing Rights in the Warsaw Convention as amended by the Bill into the currency of the State and for certifying that conversion, for the purpose of court awards for loss or damage arising in the carriage by air to which the Warsaw Convention, as so amended, applies. The amendment is in line with the Special Drawing Rights conversion provisions in sections 12, subsections (3) (a) (b) and (c) of the Oil Pollution of the Sea (Civil Liability and Compensation) Bill, 1987, which is also now before the Seanad.
|
No. 29 of 1958 |
Customs-free Airport (Amendment) Act, 1958. |
Section 11. |
|
No. 25 of 1961 |
Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1961. |
Section 3 (3), 5 and 6. |
I should like to comment on this amendment. Its purpose is simply to provide for the formal repeal of the remaining provisions of the Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1961, which are spent at this stage. These provisions related to the repayment to the Exchequer of advances made by Aer Rianta up to the early sixties and long since repaid in full. In other words, the amendment tidies up the Statute Book and the Bill provides a suitable opportunity to do so. We are now availing of that opportunity. The Second Schedule to the Bill already provides for the repeal of other spent or obsolete statutory provisions, as was indicated on Second Stage.