Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 11 November 2014

Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform: Select Sub-Committee on Finance

Irish Collective Asset-Management Vehicles Bill 2014: Committee Stage

3:25 pm

Photo of Simon HarrisSimon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 33:


In page 71, lines 28 and 29, to delete all words from and including “An” in line 28 down to and including line 29 and substitute the following:“An investment company or a UCITS constituted as a company with fixed capital or variable capital in accordance with Regulation 4(6)(b) or (c) of the UCITS Regulations may apply to the Bank to be registered as an ICAV by way of continuation.”
Section 118 is subject to a small number of amendments to correct oversights in the section as initiated. Amendment No. 33 clarifies that UCITS, which are companies that are not investment companies under Part 14 of the Companies Act 1963, soon to be Part 4 of the Companies Act 2014, that is, UCITS plcs are also eligible to convert to the ICAV form by way of continuation. It should be noted that there was no intention to exclude such companies when formulating this provision and the amendment corrects that oversight. While we envisaged this easy conversion process for AIF and UCIT company funds, funds which are not constituted as companies will have to undergo a different process to become ICAVs.
Other small changes in these amendments include devolving to the Central Bank the power to determine day-to-day policy considerations such as the form of application for a conversion and the manner in which the certificate of incorporation provided to the Central Bank should be certified. The Central Bank is better placed than the Minister for Finance to determine these matters and in this instance it is not appropriate to follow the precedent set out in company law. It is a different arrangement in terms of the Companies Registration Office.
The amendment to subsection (3)(f) is straightforward in that it merely clarifies that when setting out charges for security interests related to the conversion company, the company should also identify the priority of charges. This is something we addressed earlier in our debate on the Bill. This amendment is simple in form and effect but it rectifies an error in the original text.