Skip to main content
Normal View

SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Tuesday, 19 Nov 2002

Vol. 1 No. 1

Statute Law (Restatement) Bill, 2000: Committee Stage.

Chairman

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Hanafin, and her officials. I suggest we consider the Bill until 3.45 p.m. today and if not concluded by that time a further meeting will have to be arranged. Is that agreed? Agreed.

In accordance with the list circulated for the information of members of the committee, it is proposed to group amendments Nos. 1 and 2 and amendments Nos. 5 and 6 for the purpose of this debate. All other amendments which have not been grouped will be discussed individually.

Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.

Chairman

Amendment No. 2 is consequential on amendment No. 1 and they shall be taken together.

I move amendmentNo. 1:

In page 3, subsection (1), line 29, to delete "that has been amended".

These amendments are proposed to allow Acts that have not been amended to be included in a restatement. The Statute of Limitations Act, 1957 was amended by the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act, 2000. The Act from 2000 was not amended. To allow it to be restated, the words "that has been amended" need to be deleted. It is a technical amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 2.

In page 3, subsection (1), line 30, to delete", as so amended,".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 3, after line 35, to insert the following subsection:

"(3) A restatement may include a statutory instrument.".

This amendment is necessary to put beyond doubt the power to include statutory instruments in restatements.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 3, after line 35, to insert the following subsection:

"(3) All restatements shall be made available in both the Irish and English languages in bilingual text form or in both languages simultaneously.".

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire chuig an coiste seo. Ba mhaith liom an leasú a mhíniú agus tá súil agam go nglacfaidh sí leis. The Minister of State will recall that I raised a similar issue on Second Stage of the Interpretation Bill, as did my colleague, Deputy Ó Snodaigh, on Second Stage of this Bill.

There is an inordinate delay, up to 20 years in some instances, between the publication of legislation in English and its translation into Irish. I referred last week the case of Ó Beoláin v. Fahy before the Supreme Court. At that time Mr. Justice Hardiman described the State as having committed an offence against both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution in its failure to present simultaneous publication of legislation and all statutory instruments in both Irish and English. Arising from that, we are duty bound to give equality to the Irish language and we are clearly failing in that responsibility.

More than that, it is our responsibility to give the lead to bodies outside the Houses of the Oireachtas. It is regrettable that citizens have had to fight the State as far as Supreme Court level to have their rights as Irish speakers recognised in all respects. We must use the opportunity presented by the Statute Law (Restatement) Bill to start the process of correcting the distinct failure of the State until now.

All legislation should be published bilingually but I have constructed the amendment so that if that is not practical for the Minister of State, we can have separate texts. The key requirements are simultaneous publication and status equal to that of English being accorded to the first language. In many areas there is a notion that the Irish language is an optional extra and that is unacceptable. It is vital that we put down a marker to indicate to all citizens that the Houses of the Oireachtas will give due recognition to the role of the Irish language in society and in the life of its people. Molaim an leasú seo go láidir.

Aontaím le mórán a dúirt an Teachta mar gheall ar an ról atá ag an Dáil agus an Rialtas chun na Gaeilge a chur chun cinn ach ní féidir liom, faraoir, glacadh leis an leasú atá os ár gcomhair inniu.

Deputy Ó Caoláin mentioned there was a 20 year backlog in translations. We discussed this not only on Second Stage of this Bill, but on Second Stage of the Interpretation Bill. Since then I have been able to get the up to date position on the translation service and for current legislation there is only a one year backlog. There is, however, a gap for the majority of legislation between 1993 and 1997. This should be rectified quickly because, arising from two separate competitions for the recruitment of translators, four permanent staff and five staff on four year contracts have now been employed and it is hoped that another contract position will be filled shortly. It was very difficult to find them but now that they are in place the work can continue. It will be at least a year, however, before the impact of their work is felt mar in ainneoin cé chomh líofa is atá na daoine seo, is rud eile é an t-aistriúchán ar fad. It is a very particular skill.

There are 1,500 pages of current legislation per year to be translated. The priority is to continue with that legislation so we can meet the requirement that it should be available simultaneously. Unfortunately, if I was to accept this amendment, it would mean further delaying the translation of current Acts of the Oireachtas. Restatement is not legislation. The case mentioned referred to legislation being available in both languages. The chief translator has said that where Acts to be restated have already been translated into Irish, he will give consideration to translating their restatements. It would be extremely difficult and time consuming in the context of the priority of translating current legislation if he was to start afresh on a restatement of legislation that had not already been translated.

A contract to put all translated legislation from 1922 into electronic format will be awarded in the near future by the translation branch and will help speed up the restatements.

Tá a fhios ag an Teachta go mbeidh an Bille na dTeangacha Oifigiúla (Comhionannas) ag teacht ar aghaidh and part of that legislation states that as soon as may be after the enactment of any Act of the Oireachtas, the text thereof shall be printed and published in each of the official languages. Ba chóir go rachaidh sin beagáinín níos faide ná a théimid anois.

There is not a 20 year backlog. We are only a year behind with current legislation and we do not want to delay it any further. With the new translators we will be able to get up to speed and we do not want to delay this further by doing restatement, particularly in areas where the Bills might not have been translated. I accept the point made by Deputy Ó Caoláin but it would not be helpful in the overall picture to accept the amendment.

I made the point that I was not suggesting there was a 20 year backlog in all instances, but there are some where material goes that far back and I will highlight the legislation for the Minister of State personally.

I would like to comment on the restatements. I have made it very clear that I am asking for all restatements to be available just as I argued in the discussion on the Interpretation Bill last Thursday. All restatements should be available in both Irish and English carrying through the process of restatement of legislation. For the Minister of State to say she "will consider" the matter is not in order; it is an imperative if we are going to see through the process of restatement. I can live with her point that one can hardly restate something which has not already been translated into Irish. To go further and say she "will consider" the matter where there is already legislation in place in Irish and English and only give priority to restatement as Béarla does not translate the spirit of the commitment to the Irish language of either the State or the respective parties represented at this committee. There is an obligation. I, therefore, strongly urge the Minister of State to reconsider what she has said.

While I accept the Minister of State's point in relation to legislation as Gaeilge, I do not believe it is an option to restate the English version only and ignore the Irish language text. The notion that the Irish language text is the translation of the premier English usage is also a mistake and we should not give it any currency. It is the Irish language text of the same legislation. I wish to press my amendment and ask the Minister of State to reconsider, either now or before the Bill returns to the Dáil, because it is imperative that we reflect positively on how this business should be proceeded with.

Deputy Ó Caoláin has made a fair point. In law, under the Constitution, it is the Irish language version which is the superior copy of any document. It seems odd, therefore, not to have it available. I would also be concerned at the abolition of the first-time buyer's grant except for those living in Gaeltacht areas and presume there will be significant movement into Gaeltacht areas given that many Irish speakers live outside Gaeltacht areas. With the €5,000 grant being retained by the Minister of State's colleague there could be a population explosion in Gaeltacht areas. That would make Deputy Ó Caoláin's amendment much more urgent as a social issue.

We would all welcome more people going to live in Gaeltacht areas as there would be greater use of the Irish language. Perhaps we should give better example here. Deputy Burton will agree that in her constituency, as in mine, there are probably more Irish speakers than in many Gaeltacht areas. Anything the Government could do to promote the Irish language, its use and the development of Gaeltacht areas would be welcome. I am sure that is what the Deputy is trying to say.

In reply to Deputy Ó Caoláin's comments, there is absolutely no question of an Act in English being restated ahead of one in Irish. It is a question of priority as between restatement and current legislation. The priority has to be to have a translation of Bills passing through the House or which have just been enacted. This would fulfil our requirements under the Constitution and also our legal requirements. What the chief translator has said is that he will give favourable consideration to legislation which has already been translated rather than that which has not. He is biased in favour of doing this for legislation in the Irish language. It would be better to wait and see what the effect of the electronic format is to speed up this work. When the Bille Teanga is passed, we will have particular commitments. Our priority has to be to translate current legislation to meet our requirements. With the new staff I envisage there should not be the same backlog which none of us wants to see. I hope the matter will be addressed over the next year or two.

Amendment put and declared lost.
Question proposed: "That section 2, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

On a point of clarification, according to the explanatory memorandum section 2 provides for a restatement to exclude repealed or surplus materials and for gender-proofing of the text of legislation. It goes on to state that in accordance with section 4 a restatement will not in any way alter the substance of any Act or statutory instrument. In what respect is legislation being gender-proofed if it does not change its legislative effect?

The section to which the Deputy refers was amended in the Seanad. Is he quoting from the explanatory memorandum?

The one that was circulated.

The Bill was amended in the Seanad——

In what respect?

——to exclude gender-proofing.

I thank the Minister of State because many of the amendments tabled by my colleague, Deputy Costello, were accepted.

Question put and agreed to.
Sections 3 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 8.

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are cognate and will be discussed together.

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, line 34, to delete "made" and substitute "certified".

These are technical amendments to ensure consistency with the terminology in section 2 which refers to restatement being "certified" as opposed to "made" by the Attorney General.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 4, line 35, to delete "made" and substitute "certified".

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 4, line 37, after "sat" to insert "after the copy is laid before it".

This amendment is proposed to put beyond doubt the period during which the restatement is to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas, that is, 21 days from which each House has sat after the copy of restatement is laid before it.

Amendment agreed to.
Section 8, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 9.

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 4, lines 38 to 40, to delete subsection (1) and substitute the following:

9.-(1) The Government, following consultation with the Attorney General, may prescribe by order the form of restatements.

This amendment is proposed to clarify what it is envisaged the Government is to prescribe by order, that is, the form of restatements. It is proposed that an order be made under this section requiring restatements to be, for example, presented in consecutively numbered paragraphs and to include the Attorney General's certification.

Amendment agreed to.
Section 9, as amended, agreed to.
Section 10 agreed to.
TITLE.

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 3, lines 5 to 8, to delete all words from and including "IN" in line 5 down to and including "AMENDED" in line 8 and substitute "OF ANY STATUTE, STATUTORY INSTRUMENT OR NUMBER OF RELATED STATUTES OR STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS IN THE FORM OF A SINGLE TEXT, TO BE KNOWN AS A RESTATEMENT,".

This amendment is required to ensure the long title takes account of the amendment to section 2, namely, that a restatement may include a statutory instrument. The wording has also been modified to enhance clarity.

Amendment agreed to.
Title, as amended, agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State and her officials for attending today's session.

I thank the committee. As Deputy Burton said, a number of amendments were accepted by the Seanad where I dealt with the Bill. It is good that it has had a speedy passage here. I thank Deputies for their consideration.

Top
Share