Lack of scrutiny by opposition parties of opposition/private members bills

Trying to figure how its correct for parties to vote for various private members bills that seem to have, not small but large flaws in their concepts or justifications. which they don't seem to consider all parts but will be seen to endorse by voting for the bill. They say they deal with issues at committee but should it be before?

There some comment on the amount of private members bills being started in the Dail, most of them go nowhere, either delayed by the government and FF or by backlogs in the committee, there also questions over the quality of the bills, partly because there opposition parties didn't have the legal help the government have (although this has been reviewed and the Office of the Parliamentary Legal Advisor is being given more reseources) but they can be still used as self-promotion tool for months despite all these problems.

I've noticed that small parties and independents groups are voting for opposition bills without any of their party or Dail group speaking on the bill, so whether they support the entire bill or just parts of it, the proposing party can claim support even if there are huge flaws in the bills or their justifications.

The opposition party's refrain is that it can be fixed in the committee stage, and that is where most of the work on the bill occurs, committee officials help the politicians write a report scrutinising the bill and asking for the governments and stakeholders views on them and then proposing amendments.

But second stage is supposed to be where the general principles of the bills are discussed and I've noticed a few bills where the opposition parties don't seem to have considered the principles of the bills.

Soldarity say they are supporting the Sinn Fein's Extreme Weather (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2018
but during second stage they didn't mention one half of the bill about threatening to arrest people who might, say surf on the morning before a storm during a red weather alert, and be accused of risking the life of the of rescue workers they may or MAY NOT need help from.

The Irish Coast Guard and Irish Water Safety both already said they didn't agree with legislating to criminalise this behaviour.

Why don't private members bills have pre-legisation scruitny Government bills do.

The Irish Coast Guard and Irish Water Safety concur, and believe legislation would be almost impossible to implement fairly

Should we punish reckless people who need to be rescued Irish Times.

Listen: Irish Coastguard Director Not In Favour Of Legislating "For Stupidity". | Kfm Radio 04/20/2018

Paul Murphy spoke on the bill but only on the half of the bill related to workers being allowed off work and still being paid during a red weather alerts, his spokeperson thinks its ok to ignore the other half bill even with significant organisations disagreeing with the concept of the legislation.

I also have pointed out false claims in to justify the FF Online Social Media Online Transparancy Bill which the Socdems and Greens didn't speak on at second stage but did vote for.

Catherine Murphy's spokesperson refuses to acknowlege the problems with a section of the bill she voted for, and also said she hasn't fully considered the Extreme Weather Bill and thus missed the opportunity to express her thoughts on it at second stage it will be voted on this Thursday.

Links
Capacity Review of the Office of the Parliamentary Legal Advisor

A The passing of bills is as tortuous as it ever was, despite the era of ‘new politics’ Brendan Howlin March 20, 2018

Legislative backlog making busy fools of our politicians Parties in call to tackle growing backlog of Private Members' Bills Thursday, 22 Feb 2018 Justin McCarthy

Legislating and the art of preventing others from getting what they want Irish Examiner March 20, 2018 By Elaine Loughlin.


Oireachtas L&RS Note: Private Members’ Bills (PMBs): Admissibility, Government messages and detailed scrutiny 15 June 2018