Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The purpose of opposing the section is to give me an opportunity to ask the Minister of State to clarify an element of this section. Section 53 relates to the application to the High Court to confirm a decision to impose a major sanction so we are saying a major sanction is to be imposed or is recommended by the board. A person against whom that sanction has been applied does not appeal it and does not appeal it to the courts so he or she has had two opportunities to challenge it. In that instance, the board still has to proceed for a court confirmation of the sanction. I have no difficulty with the idea of a court confirmation of the sanction but would it not be better to place the responsibility on the person or entity who is being sanctioned to take that case and challenge the decision in the courts rather than the responsibility falling on the board and, ultimately, on the taxpayer? If I was a company or sole trader and the board imposed a very heavy sanction, of course I am going to challenge it but if I do not challenge it, surely then there is an argument to say that for the board to go to the courts is not necessary. I will not press this very strongly but I am interested to understand why even where the sanctioned entity does not appeal it to the court, the board still has to go to court. Does the Minister of State see what I am asking?