Ms Deirdre O'Higgins:

That is the fear we would have. There are certain areas of examinership law that we consider offer better protections. That is our initial view at this point. We are currently engaging in a consultation and we are interested in what our stakeholders will say to us. We do have concerns. We have a viability test at the outset of an examinership where, before we will appoint an examiner, we ask if there is a realistic or reasonable chance of survival. We brought that in in 1999, when we evaluated how examinership had been operating for the first ten years of its life. We found out that the success rate was not as high as it should be. Our view would be that if there is going to interference with the legitimate expectations of creditors to be paid and to be paid on time, it should only be done where it is proportionate. In the current version of the draft proposals - we stress that they are draft proposals and may not have any resemblance to what will come out of concluded negotiations when member states and Parliament take a view on things - we would be concerned about the testing of viability at the end of a process, which under the current directive may take up to a year. Creditors could be waiting for a year to be paid. We have not heard from stakeholders that they share those concerns as yet. Our consultation closed yesterday. We will be evaluating what our stakeholders are saying to us and we will be engaging bilaterally with them afterwards to see if it is something that is of concern to them.