Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

I am disappointed by the Minister's response. I will not say the reduction from 12 to five years is immaterial but it is relatively insignificant. The automatic discharge at 12 years is a significant step. I welcome the fact that the Minister has said he will look at reducing that.

I note that the Minister laid heavy emphasis on people who had been living a lavish lifestyle and may have traded recklessly or extracted money from their business operations for their own consumption rather than applying it to creditors and other causes. I accept that. Surely it is not beyond our wit to make a distinction in legislation between those who trade in that manner or operate recklessly and those who operate on a bone fide basis. Many of the people who could find themselves in bankruptcy in the next few years may be subcontractors who were not preferential creditors of main contractors. These are small people with families who owed money to suppliers for work they did on behalf of main contractors and who will find themselves and their families ruined financially as a consequence. A distinction needs to be made. I agree with Senator Quinn when he says we must maintain a balance, but we cannot brand honest-to-goodness people who have worked hard and given employment, and condemn them to a lifetime of inactivity simply because we have antiquated laws.

Will the insolvency Bill deal with these issues? Is that the purpose of the insolvency Bill?