A great deal of work is going on in this area. It started when Mr. Gleeson, as Attorney General, listed all the Acts on the Statute Book on a CD-ROM. Modern technology highlighted the fact that we had approximately 500 Acts dating back to 1235, which are still law because they have never been amended or repealed. The consultation process that Deputy Sargent pointed out is important, since we do not want to remove anything that is relevant. The purpose is to get rid of the irrelevant Acts. Over the summer, the Attorney General initiated a public consultation on this important issue through advertisements. I assume that it went to Deputies, but if not, I can arrange that they receive a copy.
Deputy Rabbitte's question is very important: why do it in the first place? It affects practitioners and others using our legislation in all sorts of areas — not just the legal profession, since I understand that our law on conveyancing and liquor licensing is a nightmare. An enormous number of Acts have not been consolidated. Those involved must literally go back to 1300 every time they try to do something. The Deputy and I are familiar with social welfare and tax consolidation, which we have managed, but there are many other areas. The intention is to get rid of unnecessary legislative clutter that is out of date and should be repealed.
The second task is to identify legislation that is still important but should be updated. Much of what is there is relevant but must be brought up to date. Trying to streamline the Statute Book also reduces the transaction costs associated with legal and general administration. The view is that it would in many cases lead to better regulation and by extension better competitiveness. The pre-1922 project will also serve to enhance the accessibility of the law by weeding out those Acts that are no longer relevant. To answer the question of Deputies Kenny and Rabbitte, the end of the line, which will probably take some years to reach, will be when we have got rid of all the Acts that are unnecessary and, second, found a way — as I believe has been done through the statutory law revision — to update Acts that are not irrelevant in one Act. We can do that by working with the language and bringing it forward, and the task has now been identified. Approximately 400 Acts must be addressed, but at least one would be dealing only with the latest or current Act.
The third task concerns where there is a great deal of law, for example, codifying the law on liquor licensing and criminal law, and modernising the law on conveyancing and landlord and tenant law, which would bring all the Acts up.