Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 88, line 34, to delete "privileges." and substitute the following:

"privileges,

in so much as such action does not undermine or take precedence above a person's right and entitlements as provided for in existing legislation or international treaties and agreements to which Ireland has signed up.".

What struck me was the size of the explanatory memorandum. One would almost need an explanatory memorandum just for that. One of the most striking but largely unremarked changes is that section 38 proposes to give a company the same capacity and authority as a human person. The idea behind the change is to remove the danger of ultra vires and the necessity for lengthy object clauses. Our concern is whether the provision of full and unlimited capacity for a company to carry on and undertake any business or activity or to act or enter into any transaction, having the full rights, powers and privileges of a human being, is going too far.

As to amendment No. 10, it is difficult to determine the ultimate use companies and directors could make of the provision in the Bill. In the US, this type of right has resulted in companies claiming a breach of their human rights when they are, for example, required to allow workplace inspections or, in terms of free speech, to abide by advertising rules or laws on unfair labour practices. Could this provision muddy the waters as regards the human rights obligations of those companies to which State services have been outsourced? It would be an unintended consequence, but we would be naive not to anticipate the possibility that companies could attempt to take every advantage of their newfound full and unlimited capacity, rights and privileges and seek to maximise same in their favour.

Like ICTU, Sinn Féin is of the view that this section of the Bill should be referred to the Irish Human Rights Commission, IHRC, for an assessment and recommendation. What is the Minister of State's opinion in this regard?