I move amendment No. 16:
In subsection (1), page 8, line 1, to delete "The Minister" and substitute "An Chomhairle".
I put down this amendment because I feel that it is important when setting up such a board as An Chomhairle Olla to give it some power and authority. Section 11 deals with the making of regulations relating to the purchase of wool, to premises, plant and machinery and to the register. I cannot see why the Minister should regard it as a matter of importance to retain these functions unto himself. I do not understand why he does not allow An Chomhairle Olla to prescribe the standards of buildings and equipment, the various grades of wool and the price increases and reductions to be attached to the various grades of wool. Surely, if An Chomhairle Olla has any function at all, this is where it should come in?
The great mistake the Minister is making throughout the Bill is that he is setting up a board to do a job and is leaving them without the power or authority to be respected or regarded as a group that has any authority directly to insist on standards or to decide when certain new grades and certain new performances should be prescribed. It is only the Wool Board that can be sufficiently close to this whole operation to be in a position to make these decisions if the scheme is to be a success. Still, the Minister insists that it is he who has to make all these regulations and do everything that is required to be done. As far as I can see, so much can be done by regulation made by the Minister as to make a farce of the Bill. The Minister appears to tie himself partly and then in a few sweeping lines provides that the Minister can, by regulation, do practically anything.
In subclause (b) of subsection (2) of section 11 it is provided:
in relation to every sale of wool by a producer, provide for the supply to the producer by the relevant registered buyer of a statement by such buyer containing such particulars as may be prescribed.
I wonder would the Minister give some explanation of the type of particulars he might have in mind? It is not good enough to bring legislation into the House and not be able to spell out in advance what is intended under the various subsections. No explanatory memorandum has been issued with the Bill. It is not good enough to pass these sections as they stand, knowing so very little about their contents. The whole thing is so vague that anything can be prescribed by regulation. We do not get examples as to what the Minister has in mind.
In all fairness to the House, the Minister might give some idea of what he has in mind and he should also tell the House why he feels he should retain all these powers rather than that they should be given to this board, the members of which he has insisted he must select. I do not think he should select them and I have said so already. I assume the Minister must have confidence in the people whom he himself selects. Why not give them direct power and authority to get on with the job, without the necessity to have recourse to the Minister on every occasion?