Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the fact that this section has been changed to a substantial degree. There is no doubt about that. Consequently, many of the concerns that were voiced have been met. However, there is an issue outstanding in respect of the voluntary aspect. I will not rehash the debates in which we have engaged on this matter. We will monitor what occurs and if difficulties arise, we will return to this matter either in the form of a Topical Issue Debate or on Private Members' business. I encourage the Minister of State and the Department to monitor this provision in order to gauge its effect. I understand what the Minister and Minister of State have been saying during the debates on the Bill in the context of ensuring that we have the best governance. However, we must also ensure that the latter does not impact in a negative way on the sector and, in particular, on smaller credit unions.

The second matter about which I am concerned relates to the exclusion of a staff member of a credit union from serving on the board of another credit union. There was a way to do this in the context of the conflict of interest provisions. Again, I will not revisit the debate on this matter. What I will say is that those who are voluntary assistants within credit unions or who serve on boards of directors may obtain employment in other credit unions as a result of the experience they have gained. The Bill will have the unintended consequence of forcing such people into making a choice between their job and their position on the board of directors. Such individuals or their parents may have been involved in the founding of the credit union in question and they will not be placed in a nice position. Cases of this nature may be few and far between but we should not put anyone in the position to which I refer. I accept, however, that it is too late to tweak the provision but perhaps we can revisit the matter in the future.

I strongly support the other amendments that have been put forward in this regard. I refer, in particular, to amendment No. 36, which relates to circumstances in which a person is in arrears and will be excluded from the board of directors as a result. As I pointed out on Committee Stage, such members should be forced to resign with immediate effect. It is very important that this will now be the case. I thank the Minister of State for bringing forward this amendment.

This is the only part of the Bill to which I am strongly opposed. Amendment No. 35 is actually better then the provision contained in the Bill, but it does not go far enough. That is why I wish to place on record the fact that I remain opposed to the relevant exclusions. I ask the Minister of State to monitor the position with regard to voluntary assistants and to give particular consideration to the provision under which a person will be asked to choose between his or her job and his or her membership of the board of directors.

My final point relates to amendment No. 124, which is in a later group. That amendment is relevant to the matter under discussion because it deals with the exemption clause I suggested on Committee Stage and in respect of which I tabled an amendment on Report Stage. The Minister for Finance signalled that he was open to such a clause.

Amendment No. 124 deals with that issue to a certain degree.

See this speech in context