Skip to main content
Normal View

Special Committee Value-added Tax Bill, 1971 debate -
Wednesday, 28 Jun 1972

SECTION 13.

I move amendment No. 16c:

In page 18, subsection (3), line 23, to delete "subparagraph" and to substitute "paragraph".

This is a drafting amendment to delete "subparagraph" and to substitute "paragraph".

Why? Is not this a printing error?

It is unusual to use that word "subparagraph".

It is a drafting error. What is described as subparagraph (b) is technically a paragraph, not a subparagraph.

"Subparagraph" is not used, though I noticed it in regulations. It is obviously incorrect, obviously the fault of some junior draftsman.

The expression was used here this evening.

As an example, I ask members of the Committee to look at page 19, section 15 (2) (a) (i) and (ii) and then to look at page 17, section 13 (1) (a) and (b). The former would be subparagraphs whereas the latter are paragraphs.

I never saw this word "subparagraph" until recently. The phrases used are "paragraph such-and-such of section so-and-so".

It does not matter, anyway.

I do not think it is right.

I suppose, in order to take it in, we should hear Deputy O'Donovan at some length.

I copped it only a day or two ago.

Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: "That section 13, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The word "subparagraph" occurs again in subsection (3) (b) of this section and it is the last word in (3) (d).

We are not discussing that. That has gone.

It is at the top, line 5.

Properly so, the Minister will hold.

The Minister will hold properly so.

Question put and agreed to.
Section 14 agreed to.
Top
Share