Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 26, between lines 1 and 2, to delete ", or may be,"

As I spoke about this yesterday, I need not repeat myself. It basically says that the supervisory authority may give notice to the directors where "it appears to the Supervisory Authority that there is, or may be, a question whether the annual accounts comply with the Companies Acts." Yesterday I used the term "belt and braces" which is what it seems to be. While I have not seen this before, I would have thought it should have said: "if it appears to the Supervisory Authority that there is a question", which gives considerable freedom. It seems to be over the top to say "it appears to the Supervisory Authority that there is, or may be". Why not insert "or perhaps" on top of that along with other words that would be open to the accusation of tautology? It is extreme and almost suggests wanting to make sure it will be able to do anything it wants to do. Although it is unlikely to happen, if a vindictive individual were to delay something just to embarrass somebody, this gives the freedom to do so. I urge the Minister to reconsider.