Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I would like to speak on sections 14, 15 and 16, as they all cover the area of deductions from earnings. I have concerns with regard to the State interfering directly in a person's personal finances. However, this has been done already in some areas - for example, where the State has imposed the pension levy.

My real concern is that the court may make an order directing the person's employer to deduct a fine from the person's earnings and to pay the sums deducted in that matter or specified in the order. The issue of fines is a private matter and should remain so, and I do not agree that a person's employer should become another party to the matter of a fine. The court should be allowed to make an order against the person to pay through his or her earnings, but should not be allowed to instruct the employer to deduct and pay the sums involved. This would be another burden and barrier for business and would increase costs, and I am totally opposed to it.

As an employer for many years, I was shocked to see more barriers being imposed on me as an employer. I have spoken on this issue quite a bit at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, and I believe we must remove these barriers. This may be seen as a small measure, but in business, particularly in the retail business, margins are very tight. A small or medium-sized business could well be pushed over the edge by these new rules requiring it to comply with attachment orders. I am sure Senators with business experience would understand my concerns in this area.

In addition, subsection (7) makes it an offence for an employer, without reasonable cause, to fail to comply with so-called attachment orders. I believe it is a backward step in our fines system to impose such an obligation on a business. Placing stringent and ridiculous obligations on businesses throughout the country at this time is extraordinary. This is a time of recession and we should be setting up conditions for businesses to grow and develop. This part of the legislation impedes this. I wonder what the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, and the Minister of State, Deputy Perry, think of these parts of the Bill. Did the Minister consult them on this part of the Bill? My guess is they would not be happy with it.

If I was an employee and had a problem paying a fine, I would be upset to know that my employer knew my situation and that this could put my reputation and job in jeopardy. This would be the case if we pass the Bill as it stands. We should not drag all of these parties into the minor matter of a fine. Let us not air people's dirty linen in public. I believe sections 14, 15 and 16 should be deleted in their entirety if we are serious about business in this country.

Let us not put more red tape on businesses for the purpose of fines. Let it be between the court and the person who has to pay the fine. Do not bring the employer in as a third party; keep it simple for everybody.

As a business person with many years’ experience of starting a business, running it on a day-to-day basis and creating jobs, I totally oppose these parts of the Bill. It is clear in my mind, and would be to any rational person, these parts of the Bill are not needed. I call on the Minister of State to remove these sections of the Bill and I believe that employers, especially in SMEs up and down the country, will have a major concern about these sections.

I have raised this part of the Bill with several business owners and they could not believe that this was included in it. They were shocked. For this reason I urge the Minister of State to accept the amendment to take these out. If somebody is charged to pay a fine that is his or her business but it should not also be the business of his or her employer to have to collect it for the State. I believe that should be opposed.