Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Again, there is just a concern when one aspect of an appeals system is removed whether that system is strong enough. It is a matter of the sense of confidence in that appeals system and that it is entirely independent. I take the Minister of State's point.

Another welcome aspect that I have raised on the floor of the Chamber is about people purporting to be a charity and using so-called charity numbers. The Chairman has raised it as well. It mostly is about people who go door to door to collect clothes. These operations are big, including a very large one in our constituency, and this issue needs to be addressed.

Head 20, the proposed new section 54B, relates to avoiding conflicts of interest. The Companies Act wording recognises there may be circumstances in which conflicts of interest arise and this could be managed within an organisation through its governance documents in respect of its members. The Companies Act has a similar wording which it is felt would be more appropriate than the legislation as proposed. Perhaps it could be looked at.

The proposed section 54B(3) in head 20 relates to an obligation to remove a trustee. It has been stated that it is not clear whether a charitable trust will be given the power to positively act to remove a charity trustee who is in default and that this point needs to be clarified. The issue relates to a person who may be bankrupt but has been discharged. Will the Charities Regulator be notified that it is agreed the person can remain on the board if the bankruptcy has been discharged? Does that make sense? There is an issue whereby a person can be disqualified from being a member of a board if he or she has been declared bankrupt. If that bankruptcy has been discharged, it is unclear whether the person can still remain as a member of the board.

Head 29 on the proposed amendment of section 89, deals with agreements between a charity and the charity trustees or connected persons. It has been stated there is a concern this does not take into account the possibility that some CEOs, especially of health-related charitable trusts, could be in breach of the section. The definition of "personal connections" is extremely broad and has the ability to encompass a very wide variety of persons. It is felt that this point could be clarified.

In another point, it has been stated there could be an addition to the Bill relating to section 39 of the Charities Act 2009. There is an area where electronic or tap donations are increasingly frequent and it is recommended that the provisions of the Charities Act 2009 be commenced as soon as possible. There should also be an opportunity for a charitable organisation to restructure itself and not have to go through the arduous task of having to register as a new charity.

The last piece is the register of merged charities. There is currently no way of knowing who is involved in a merged charity or where the charity came from. It has been recommended that a register of merged charities be established. It is interesting in that I went through a merger process myself and it was probably one of the most frustrating events through which I have ever gone. It took approximately two and a half years. There was a new board of a new company but if somebody went back to look at the two previous charities that merged into one, no one would have a clue from where it came. It would be useful to have a process whereby people could go back and track the lineage of a charity to see where it came from and whether there might be any issues coming from that.