Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)

I move amendment No. 90:

In page 60, line 29, to delete "shall" and substitute "may".

Amendment No. 91 provides that the chief superintendent concerned may refuse an application, or revoke a non-cash collection permit where he is of the opinion that collectors on behalf of the applicant have previously, or are likely to, so conduct themselves, whether by way of harassment, intimidation, or assertive collecting as to be likely to give rise to complaints from members of the public.

The intent of this amendment relates to an earlier amendment in the name of Deputy Wall on which I spoke. We need a traceability mechanism to deal with rogue practice in any organisation. Such practice is not prevalent to any great extent in the charity sector but there is concern about it in some areas. We see it used every day of the week. Walking down a main street, one is almost doorstepped by a cash collector. It is not a case of being asked if one would like to donate; one cannot walk from one end of Patrick Street in Cork to the other or down O'Connell Street in Dublin without being hit upon by a number of such collectors.

The intent of Deputy Wall's amendment is not only to ensure the regulation of the permits granted but to encourage a code of practice to ensure appropriate collection methods and address what could be construed as strong doorstepping and presentational skills in the collection of money for charities on the street.

See this speech in context