Maurice Quinlivan (Limerick City, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The second item on the agenda is the briefing on the Duffy Cahill report of 2016 related to redundancy processes. The report was an expert examination of legal protection for workers with a particular focus on ensuring that limited liability and corporate restructuring are not used to avoid a company's obligations to its employees. The examination looked specifically at situations where assets of significant value are separated from the operating entity, being the employer, and how the position of employees can be better protected in such situations.

To assist the committee in its consideration of this matter, I am pleased to welcome the authors of the Duffy Cahill report, Ms Nessa Cahill and Mr. Kevin Duffy. Members can see them on the screens behind and in front of them. They are joining us online and will have five minutes each for their introductory speeches. I ask them to deal with their main points within five minutes if their speech is longer than that.

I will give an update on parliamentary privilege, especially the notices to witnesses. There are limitations to parliamentary privilege in the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. However, today's witnesses are giving evidence remotely from a place outside parliamentary precincts and, as such, may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal prosecution or proceedings as a witness physically present does. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If the witnesses' statements are potentially defamatory, therefore, in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with all such directions.

Opening statements from Ms Cahill and Mr. Duffy have already been circulated to members to commence their consideration of this matter. I invite Ms Cahill to make her opening statement.