Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I will speak to the amendment. We could become involved in an argument with regard to the supports available to small and large businesses. However, as stated in reply to a previous amendment, between 250 and 300 individuals who own small businesses of various sizes attended an event in Cork yesterday in order to learn about the business supports provided by over 27 agencies of the State. Factually, the Deputy's statement is just not correct.

In the context of the amendment, the law on unlimited companies is governed by EU directives and any proposed changes to Irish law would produce few, if any, benefits for the creditors of such companies. However, such changes would give rise to a substantial cost to this country in terms of its international commercial competitiveness. Ireland is a small island nation and the foreign direct investment sector here is responsible for employing many thousands of people either directly or indirectly, in the context of sub-supply or in the provision of services. The fact that foreign direct investment companies operate here gives rise to downstream benefits, in terms of supply, for many of the small businesses we are discussing. I accept the Deputy's concern with regard to the ownership of unlimited companies. This issue will be dealt with in the coming months in the context of the accounting directive, which is due for transposition in 2015. The debate relating to said directive is the most suitable avenue for considering the issues raised by the Deputy.

The primary aim of the Bill before the House is to consolidate and tidy up the existing law. It is also designed to provide an accessible, user-friendly framework for businesses operating within our shores. I reiterate that EU law does not require reporting on the part of unlimited companies. That is the position in law at present.

See this speech in context