Michael McNamara (Clare, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Okay, of course. I raised the definition of high-risk vendor with the Minister on Committee Stage in the committee room.

It had been inserted the night before, so there was not a great deal of time to analyse it, but we were assured it was common in this type of legislation across the EU and that we were implementing an EU framework. When I asked whether there was particular legislation, I was told there was. The Minister of State's officials were kind enough to send me translations from which they were working. I appreciated that greatly, but when I went through them, I found the term "high-risk vendor" nowhere. Maybe I missed it, as there was a great deal of legislation. There was legislation from practically every EU member state, but none of them used the term "high-risk vendor". Will the Minister of State point to another country that uses it specifically? He will not disagree with me when I say it is a pejorative term. No one would like to be labelled a high-risk vendor, even in a Sunday market, much less in the corporate world that the Bill is seeking to regulate. If someone is labelled a high-risk vendor, it will have implications. Name countries that use this term. Why did the Minister of State decide to use such a pejorative term? It is unusually pejorative for legislation, particularly legislation affecting companies that are, by definition, based outside Ireland. Pejorative terms have the habit of spiralling into conflicts. For the avoidance of doubt, I do not mean armed conflicts, but trade conflicts. People get upset. Is there no better terminology that could be used? What countries use this terminology and why is the Government using it?

Are we considering amendments Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive?

See this speech in context