Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

So many subcontractors were involved in this project and the collapse of Carillion has had such an impact on them that I do not think their anger will dissipate. Whether they get satisfaction is one issue but there is another issue. When the subcontractors' Bill was being introduced I remember the then Minister of State, Mr. Brian Hayes, saying that it was not going near the arrangement with receiverships and liquidations. In other words, the Bill was never going to deal with non-payment and it dealt with late payment. The rule in this country is that the banks are first in line, then Revenue, and finally, whatever crumbs are left are divvied up between everyone else. That is the case in some countries but is not the case in several others. In the US, for example, there is protection for subcontractors. One can get a lien on a contract if one is owed money and can prove it.

I know that officials hail from different Departments and that these matters relate to lots of areas. In 2014, we debated company law and argued for over 1,400 pages of the legislation with the then Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton. Is it not imperative that we change an arrangement where the small fella gets shafted first and the biggest fella is looked after best? That need not be the case. In most states in America, the subcontractor is protected. Can the witnesses tell me why they think we do not protect the subcontractor in this country but protect the bank first?