Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 30 Nov 2016

Vol. 931 No. 1

Statute Law Revision Bill 2016 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Yesterday we discussed how our Statute Book lay and everybody in the House, as I noted yesterday, was in favour of making it much cleaner and more accessible. The Bill deals with legislation from the founding of the State to the 1950s. Most of the Bills are definitely superfluous, although some are of major interest. I raised a question yesterday about the Garda Síochána legislation, particularly the Act initiating the Garda Síochána that is being repealed with this Bill. I hope the Minister of State will be able to reassure us on Committee Stage that this will have no effect on subsequent legislation that firmed up An Garda Síochána. I presume that is the case. It was originally known as a civic guard Bill until the final moments when Cathal O'Shannon proposed "An Garda Síochána" as the title.

There are other pieces of legislation, such as that relating to emergency powers. We only just had the debate in the Dáil about rent control and when there is an emergency, the State can move emergency legislation. It is not that I would like anything like the Public Safety (Emergency Powers) Act to be passed in this House ever again. We have the Offences against the State Act, which superseded that legislation in 1939. It is still on the Statute Book and has been enhanced. The emergency powers Act of that time led to the execution by this State of what were known historically as the 77, although there were 83, I believe, official State executions, not to mind the 110 who were executed upon arrest without any recourse to any semblance of a trial or military tribunal. That legislation is being eliminated and it also gave effect to internment without trial during the Civil War. Some of the legislation being repealed is Civil War legislation.

There are other interesting examples from an historical and nerdy perspective. When I looked through the list I laughed at the Eucharistic Congress (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1932. I hope it will not be repeated the year after next when the Pope comes to Ireland. That legislation allowed people to drive public buses or vehicles without a licence. There does not seem to have been enough licenceholders in the country and sufficient people were coming that they needed people to drive the buses. It also allowed licensed premises to open extended hours at certain times and be restricted at other times, I presume for some of the masses in the afternoon etc. It is interesting that although I presume some of the debate was around the Eucharistic Congress, the Dáil spent most of its time discussing the driving of buses to and from the venues and the effects on the delegates attending. It was a major event and, in some ways, looking back at the legislation, it seems very simple seen through our modern eyes. It was very practical legislation and it was an example of something much shorter than some of the legislation we produce today.

One of the longer pieces of legislation I looked at that has been repealed is the Spanish Civil War (Non-Intervention) Act 1937. It was interesting for the time and if we look at the debate, it was quite far-ranging and different from what we would have today. There are some comments one might not believe, such as Eamon de Valera being accused of being a supporter of the reds. I do not think anybody would have felt that. It was a different era. Last week we discussed neutrality and it is in that context that we might look at it. The context was different, nonetheless, as the State allowed General Eoin O'Duffy to leave the country under much fanfare with his volunteers in the Blueshirts. They were blessed on their way to attack the forces of the republic in Spain and supposedly to defend Christianity but they spent most of their time in the pub, coming back disgraced in ignominy. Nothing was heard of the Blueshirts, in many ways, afterwards because they did not assert themselves well. Those who took the side of the republic, standing by the revolution in Spain, did so quietly and left the country without fanfare. They suffered the consequences of taking that side before coming back to Ireland and suffered further consequences from a religiously run State. They were frowned upon, ignored and ostracised in many ways. It is a pity, but many of their memoirs have come to the fore in recent years. Those people were open, energetic and focused in their community. It is a pity they were ostracised but that was not the intention of the Act at the time. It was enacted so the State would not take sides or encourage anybody one way or the other. It would not facilitate the movement of armaments or soldiers through Ireland on the way to war, so it is a pity the same kind of legislation is not there today to deal with Shannon Airport's issues. There are often similarities and differences between today and what happened in the past.

This Bill is a good piece of work. I was critical in the past that JobBridge was used in formulating the Bill as there was no guaranteed work at the end of the process. That criticism was answered and I am not making a complaint at this stage. We have dealt with that and JobBridge is over. How many more pieces of legislation will need to be eliminated? At least we are up to the 1950s at this stage and I cannot see many more pieces of statute law revision coming forward. It is interesting to see that one of the pieces of legislation we repealed is being reinstated, which demonstrates that we can make mistakes in this House.

This has been a useful piece of work. Yesterday, my colleague, Deputy Cullinane, referred to my request that there would be a searchable archive of legislation. I understand the information is available but there should be a single source for the available material when the process is finished. The process will be beneficial but when it is completed I ask that the Government set aside whatever sum of money is required for that objective. I assume it would not be that much because the work has been done and the documents have been found and assessed. Somebody should have ready access to the information and that job can produce something worthwhile for future historians. I wish the Minister of State well with the legislation. If he does not get to answer all those questions I may contribute again on Committee Stage in order to further elaborate on them.

I thank the Deputies for their contributions to this debate. Statute law revision is a very interesting and important piece of work. Taking the contributions made by Deputies in the course of our discussion on Second Stage yesterday evening and Deputy Ó Snodaigh's continued contribution this evening, one can look back at these Acts seeking parallels with the present day. One can find different information or interests and, as the Deputy noted, it allows us as legislators to get our nerd on in a way and dig deep. We can find it very interesting from that perspective. However, the work is also very important in what it does, so I thank everybody for their contribution.

As Deputy Ó Snodaigh stated, the Bill proposes repealing spent and obsolete Acts enacted between 1922 and 1950. It is interesting that it is the first comprehensive review of Acts enacted by the Oireachtas and it will result in a significant reduction in the size of the Statute Book for that period.

Even though it is not the first time we have done a piece of work like this, it is the first time we have been looking at legislation from the Oireachtas. That it is a first in this regard makes this Bill an important piece of work. When the Bill is enacted, it will help to reduce the regulatory burden for business, industry and citizens by simplifying the complex stock of legislation that is currently on the Statute Book. It will also help to provide further legal clarity in this area.

Before we conclude and the Bill moves on to next week's Committee Stage debate, I would like to respond to a number of points that were made during this Second Stage debate yesterday and this evening. I want to make it clear in response to points that were made by Deputies Calleary and O'Callaghan that the Government has not decided to stop the statute law revision programme. We recognise the value of this project and the benefits it brings. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform is proposing to pause the programme at this time so that the Department can make progress with other priorities. The Government reform unit in the Department, which has led this programme since 2012, is currently heavily involved in work on the Public Sector Standards Bill 2015 and the forthcoming data sharing and governance Bill, which will be published in the new year. The Government, like many Members of the House, is attaching a high priority to these significant and complex Bills. The Government reform unit is also involved in the reviews of the lobbying and protected disclosures Acts. These tasks are priorities at this time. The Minister will keep his priorities under review. Consideration will be given to the matter again in due course.

The statute law revision programme is not the only initiative to make the Statute Book more transparent and accessible. The Law Reform Commission's work on the legislation directory is ongoing. This is a vital source of information for legal professionals and anyone working with legislation. It assists them in checking the current version of the law. The index currently tracks changes to primary legislation from the pre-1922 and post-1922 periods and to secondary legislation from 1998 onwards. Work is progressing on expanding the directory. I understand that an index of statutory instruments from 1997 will be published in the near future.

Deputy O’Callaghan asked a question about the cost-efficiency of the delivery of this programme. Approximately €623,000 has been spent since the programme transferred to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in 2012. Expenditure on the Bill before the House to date amounts to approximately €285,000. This expenditure does not relate solely to work on the preparation of the legislation. A proportion of the spending relates to the legal advisory functions carried out by legal adviser to the Government reform unit. This legal advisory role has been applied to a range of other legislative priorities, such as the Freedom of Information Acts, the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 and the Public Sector Standards Bill 2015.

Deputies Cullinane and Ó Snodaigh raised the issue of the availability of the text of the statutes repealed by the Statute Law Revision Acts 2005 to 2016. I share their view that these texts would be of interest to historians, parliamentarians and the public. As I have mentioned, the Law Reform Commission has made most of the pre-1922 public general Acts that remain in force available online. I am not aware of any plans to make the text of pre-1922 repealed Acts or instruments available electronically. This would be a matter for the Law Reform Commission. The text of the majority of these Acts and instruments are available to the public in hard copy. No text has survived in the cases of a small number of pre-1922 Acts and instruments. Examples include texts of Irish Private Acts that were held in the Four Courts in 1922.

The Statute Law Revision Act 2007 repealed public general legislation pre-1922. The texts of these statutes were spread among a number of collections available in the National Library. To assist in the identification of the source of these statutes, the citation system used for each of these statutes is set out in the Act and includes references to the relevant source documents. Similarly, the source documents for the pre-Independence statutory instruments repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 2015 can be identified by the citations in that Act. Sources used for the 2015 Act include the Dublin Gazette, the London Gazette, the Irish Manuscripts Commission and certain other printed collections. The London Gazette is available online. The statute law revision team reviewed hard copies of the Dublin Gazette from the National Library.

The Statute Law Revision Acts 2009 and 2012 repealed local and personal Acts and Private Acts from before 1922. In the course of their work, the research team viewed texts of the Acts made available by the Honourable Society of King's Inns, the Oireachtas Library, the National Library, the National Archives and the UK parliamentary archives at the House of Lords and the House of Commons in Westminster. Fortunately, the text of all Acts enacted by the Oireachtas are available electronically at www.irishstatutebook.ie. The text of all Acts repealed by this Bill will remain available electronically.

Deputy Ó Snodaigh asked yesterday whether there has been a proper discussion of the Acts proposed for repeal in the Bill before the House. The Bill was subject to a public consultation process. A list of all Acts identified as suitable for repeal was published on the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform's website and the public was invited to comment on the list. In addition, all Government Departments and relevant local authorities have been consulted and advised on Acts of relevance to them. Relevant bodies and organisations are made aware of the legislation being assessed for revocation.

I was also asked about the remaining work that is to be completed under the statute law revision programme. This falls broadly into three categories, the first of which comprises charters and letters patents from 1066 to 1922. The second category comprises three types of secondary legislation: secondary instruments from 1821 to 1922, statutory rules and orders from 1922 to 1947 and statutory instruments from 1948 to date. The third category comprises two types of post-1922 primary legislation: public general Acts from 1951 to date and Private Acts from 1922 to date.

I thank all Members for their involvement in this debate. I look forward to further deliberations on Committee Stage next week. If Members have any further questions, we can go through them then.

Question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn