I move amendment No. 210:
In page 22, subsection (2), lines 19 and 20, to delete "he or she shall nominate a person to preside in his or her place" and substitute "be replaced by the Registrar, or the equivalent officer, or by his or her nominee".
This amendment is in the interests of registrars all over the country.
In the interests of clarity, I do not understand the reasoning behind the proposed amendment. Is it that the registrar would choose the appropriate person?
I am sorry, I thought we had debated this already.
No. The Deputy speaks first and I may have the answer.
Give me the answer.
I asked the Deputy a question. Would the registrar choose an appropriate person to preside if he or she were not present, or the chief officer? Why should the chief officer not choose the person to preside in his or her place? I cannot see the reasoning behind this.
It would be the registrar. The chief officer would specifically be replaced by the registrar.
Because the chief officer is answerable and accountable, it is only proper that whoever replaces them should also carry that accountability. The registrar is not defined in the same way in each of the institutions. There is no reason the chief officer could not do it; but the chief officer would find the replacement.
