Ms Fiona O'Dea:

In response to the Senator's query around reflecting on SCARP and any improvements we might make, SCARP and the legislation that underpinned it were necessarily developed at speed. I think it took about six months. Ms Keane will remember those days, and the sleepless nights and so forth. It was done carefully but nonetheless, there were a few technical matters that require refinement and will be addressed in the miscellaneous provisions Bill. We have identified some gaps in the process. If we plug those gaps, it will allow us to collate a bit more data, which obviously underpins any policy decisions we make in terms of any future changes to the process. Most of the changes are to plug gaps in the process.

Two more fundamental changes are in response to requests for amendments made by Deputy O'Reilly during the passage of the Bill. One was for the process adviser, when bearing in minding the factors around making a decision as to whether the company should enter SCARP, and whether it is potentially viable, to extend the factors out to consider the social and cultural importance of the company. Another is on the issue of the fees of the process adviser because a creditor can go to court if it has a concern around the fees of the process adviser. Where it is being considered by the court, the court could ask the process adviser why they may not have used the services of the company and the staff facilities as they were conducting their work and putting the plan together.

Company law is dynamic and we always keep it under review. Nearly every year, a miscellaneous provisions Bill comes out of the 2014 Act, so we do respond to public consultation.