On behalf ofDeputy Little, who has not yet come in, I move amendment 1, as follows:—
Section 1, line 17, to add after line 17 the following definition:— the expression " competent knowledge of the Irish Language " means such a degree of oral and written proficiency in the use of the language as is sufficient to enable a legal practitioner properly to conduct the business of his clients in the Irish language.
I agree with that amendment. When I was speaking in the Dáil, I thought that in the first year or two there might be a certain amount of latitude allowed. Thinking the matter over since, I have come to the conclusion that it would be better to have a standard declared such as this. The fixing of a full standard of knowledge might possibly involve some consideration as to whether the age might not be lowered somewhat from sixteen. I believe, as we want to have barristers and solicitors who are able in any court in the country to conduct cases through Irish, that we should fix a standard, as suggested by this amendment.
I am in entire agreement that this amendment should be put in, but let us see how it reads as it is down: " the expression " the Incorporated Law Society' means the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland acting under their present . . . the expression ‘ competent knowledge of the Irish language ' means such a degree of oral and written proficiency in the use of the language as is sufficient to enable a legal pracitioner properly to conduct the business of his clients in the Irish language." That is not English.
This is a new definition.
The amendment comes in after the word " charter."
It will be a new sub-paragraph after line 17.
Deputy Wolfe has not the proper paper before him.
I have not got the printed copy of the amendments.
This amendment adds a new definition. It is quite right so far as the form is concerned.
There is at present in Ireland one solicitor who possesses such a degree of oral proficiency in the use of the language as would enable him properly to conduct the business of his clients in the Irish language.
There is more than one. There are three or four, and there are a lot of District Justices who were formerly solicitors.
We also know the number of years it will take to acquire that proficiency.
That will arise under future amendments.
It will be possible to discuss the number of years it will take under a later section of the Bill.
I agree. The later section of the Bill adds to the victimisation.
It will be possible to make whatever provision you like as to time in that definition of " competent knowledge " which comes into operation under a later section.
It would be necessary to reduce the age very much if you make that amendment.
I have it from one of the most competent masters of Irish in the House that a girl who had passed the Junior Grade Intermediate with honours in Irish, Middle Grade Intermediate with honours in Irish, Senior Grade Intermediate with honours in Irish and Matriculation of the National University with honours in Irish, knows no Irish. What is going to happen in this case I do not know.
It must be some years ago since that girl went through the Intermediate. There is no Senior Grade now.
The present Leaving-Certificate standard in Irish is high, but the Matriculation standard is not high.
This was not the Leaving Certificate.
It must have been under the old system.
What I have to say applies to a number of the amendments. I think we all agree that this amendment, as it is, is quite all right, but we have to be fairly careful with regard to the drafting of some of the amendments further on which are a bit involved. We might possibly agree on the substance of the amendments and defer the wording until it could be properly considered. The wording of the amendments at present may be such as would not accord with the other provisions of the Bill. That happens, of course, in the case of ordinary Bills which come before the Dáil. In Committee, the substance is agreed to and the Minister in charge undertakes to have a proper amendment drafted. We, of course, are in a different position. When we have finished with the Bill, I should like that the measure would be complete and that it would not be necessary for any member of the Committee to bring in amendments on Report Stage. That would involve a great deal of extra time in the House, even though the amendments were agreed to. I do not know if there is any means of getting over that. One way would be to deal with the amendments and, subsequently, to have them examined by the official draftsman, if that could be arranged. He could see whether the amendments were properly drafted. If they were not properly worded, a proper draft could be submitted and at a subsequent meeting of this Committee the amendments so drafted could be adopted, so that the Bill would be complete when it would come before the House.
I would undertake, if the principle of an amendment were agreed to here and the form were faulty, to ask the official draftsman to embody the idea in a properly drafted amendment. Whether it would be possible to bring the amendment up again at the Committee, I do not know.
It would not be possible. This Committee is in the same position as a Committee of the whole House and it would not be possible to have any change made in amendments passed by the Committee except on Report Stage.
Possibly the question may not arise, but if there were general agreement on the substance of an amendment, we might possibly postpone its further consideration with a view to having the amendment properly drafted.
Could you not recommit the Bill in respect of the particular amendments.
Surely it would not be necessary to do that. If there were any slight alteration to be made, it could easily be made by consent on Report Stage.
There is a difficulty. In the ordinary case, the whole House is present at the Committee Stage of a Bill and they know all the amendments that have been proposed. Each member of the House, in this case, if amendments were proposed on Report, would feel that he was entitled to go into the whole matter again.
There is no getting over that.
You are going to take a great deal more time then. You are giving them an extra opportunity.
The only way to get over that is to be careful in the drafting of the amendments.
The difficulty with us is that we cannot have the advantage of the services of the official draftsman.
I do not think there is any very serious question likely to arise. In any event, I do not see any way out of the difficulty unless you are prepared to re-commit the Bill. Alterations can only be made on Report Stage.
