Some of my colleagues have commented on amendments Nos. 4 to 7.

I will be brief on amendment No. 3. This amendment seeks to ensure that the democratic mandate for directly elected mayor given in 2019 by the people of Limerick will be respected and properly reflected and that an election for the office will take place this year. The people have been waiting a long time, since 2019. The amendment provides that the necessary sections of the legislation on holding a mayoral election must be commenced within three months of the Bill's passage. This is to ensure no delay in the elect…

I accept the Minister of State's bona fides, of course. We were not seeking to just commence some sections, but we wanted to make sure there were not sections uncommenced. I am accepting his piece on that, but my understanding is that the intention is that the election would take place in June or this year.

Okay. I thank the Minister of State very much. Based on that, I am happy to withdraw the amendment.

If it is okay with the Minister of State, I will contribute now for efficiency. Regarding my colleague’s amendment and the two years to three years, there are certain aspects we will come to later in the Bill that I am concerned may need a review, particularly the Schedule and the number of powers that are out of reach of the mayor. I think issues with the curtailment of powers for the mayor due to the excessive number of items on the Schedule that are still given to the director general will arise earlier than two…

I am seeking to ensure the inclusion of the elected members because currently there is no guarantee of their inclusion.

It does not state that. Is the Minister of State guaranteeing that such reviews will include them?

It would be useful if that could be specified.

I will move backwards. The Minister of State mentioned evolution and with amendment No. 7 we were attempting to signal the next steps needed in evolution. However, we have to be very honest about local authority powers because we have not been seeing evolution in the last number of years. What we have seen is an extraordinary roll backwards with respect to powers. We have seen it in planning Bill after planning Bill and we have seen it with different aspects of legislation. We have seen the erosion of powers again …

I move amendment No. 6: In page 12, line 36, after “Mayor,” to insert “the elected council of”. I will withdraw the amendment and I reserve the right to reintroduce it.

I move amendment No. 7: In page 12, after line 38, to insert the following: “(3) In conducting a review under this section, the Minister shall examine the manner in which the powers afforded to the elected council intersect with those of the Mayor and shall look to ways in which the powers of the elected council, including powers in terms of revenue-raising measures, could be increased.”.

On Senator Gavan's amendment No. 11, these are reasonable and appropriate powers ensuring it is not just a place to visit but a place where people can live and work for a wage that allows them to live. There are a few areas where I will have complementary amendments. The public realm is a key aspect of what people expect from a mayor. I have certain amendments in relation to the functions which seek to ensure that public space is part of what the mayor delivers. Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 seek to address a wide, prin…

He could save a lot of time. It would save us from having to produce primary legislation simply to remove something that should not have been put in a Schedule in the first place. I shall now speak very briefly about amendments Nos. 12 and 13, which I believe are in the same grouping. Amendment No. 12 relates to an issue flagged during pre-legislative scrutiny by the Library and Research Service, namely that the existing executive functions are not listed anywhere. There is a very general provision in the Local Gov…

I move amendment No. 26: In page 39, line 18, to delete “14 days” and substitute “28 days”.

I would not have that degree of scepticism in respect of the role of fact checking and think it has been an important aspect, given the times when we have had tides of dangerous misinformation, for example, during the period of Covid. It is important that there are places where people can go to get verified information and to check the sources of information to see what may have been decontextualised and, for example, to find the origin of statistics and get that key information. I believe, therefore, that there is…

Sorry. It would not be the practice that allegations would be made against organisations, especially when they are not present.

It is not appropriate.

I thank the Minister of State for his appropriately detailed response. It is regrettable that the speed at which the Bill is moving does not allow us to have the normal Committee and Report Stages, as we should have, where we could be refining and learning from each other’s amendments and proposals. I am pleased to hear about the information given in respect of the database at EU level. That is useful and very good. In terms of the pattern, I still have a small concern. I am dealing with the issue of the flaggers b…

The proxy marker is a specific one because it is not always algorithmic; it can be done in purchasing of advertising and can be around a product.

I will be very brief. I thank the Minister of State for his response. I look forward to further engagement. As regards these amendments I have tried to bring back in, I wish to flag that it is a concern that they relate to report amendments. They simply request reports. I looked at the rationale for ruling them out of order and it seems to have been due to a cost to the Exchequer. It is as if paper or the work of reports is becoming a cost to the Exchequer. It is an unprecedented thing for amendments requesting rep…