Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I welcome the Minister to the House. I find Senator Mullen's Bill to be very interesting. He aimed at something for which he believes there is a need. I think there is a need for it. I would like to tell a story that happened in my company many years ago, as the Minister spoke about a supermarket and small trader a few minutes ago. There was a farmer supplying us with potatoes for a year - a very small supplier - and he charged us mistakenly for one bag when he was supplying four bags. Our accounts office drew my attention to it after about six months. This may have been 30 years ago, and there was a £10,000 discrepancy. My own credit man asked whether we really had to draw his attention to this, because it was costing us a lot of money to check these accounts, and since we check them to make sure we are not being overcharged, perhaps we should get the benefit if we are undercharged. However, there was no real discussion on it; he was just making a point. We asked the supplier to come in and he came in with his accountant. I must say that I was a little naughty because when the four of us sat at the table, I told him there had been a mistake in his invoicing for six months. His accountant, who obviously made a deal with him that he was not to open his mouth, claimed there was no mistake. This went on for around ten minutes until we drew his attention to the fact that we owed him £10,000, rather than the other way around. I gathered the accountant was no longer working for him the following day.

There is a need for some remedy, whether it is legislation such as Senator Mullen has proposed or whether there is, as the Minister said, some other way of doing it. The Bill highlights the area of business ethics. I am not sure how big a problem it is, as most businesses need to form close working relationships with their suppliers and they are mutually beneficial. Most companies with which I have worked have behaved in an ethical manner, but it is an area that needs to be highlighted none the less.

Let us say one finds a wallet in the street with €200 and the name and address of the owner. If one keeps it and makes no attempt to return it, that would be considered dishonest. It is dishonest. If one receives a duplicated payment of €200 from a client, one knows their name and address and if one keeps it and makes no attempt to return it, then it is surely as dishonest as the previous example. There is little doubt it is unethical and dishonest. One could ask whether there is a need for legislation. I think there is a need.

One could also ask whether we should look more explicitly at Government contracts. Will the legislation fully apply to Government and private sector business? Senator Mullen has spoken of how in the United States the rules governing the relationship are much more explicit. As the Minister has explained, in the United States the federal acquisition regulation, FAR, is limited to procurement contracts. I gather from what he said that it is to the government's benefit to do that. The regulation refers to: "Knowing failure by a principal, until 3 years after final payment on any Government contract awarded to the contractor, to timely disclose to the Government, in connection with the award, performance, or closeout of the contractor a subcontract thereunder, credible evidence of...significant overpayment(s) on the contract". The obligation to return overpayments as outlined in the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act 2009 applies to overpayments made in virtually any context, including under grants, core operative agreements and other federal acquisition rules-based agreements. Our procurement industry is massive. The all-island market is currently estimated at approximately €20 billion.

One could ask whether we should examine other issues such as Government-public relations and issues such as overpayments of social welfare. Overpayments rose from €50 million to €83 million between 2007 and 2010, including mistakes by recipients and administration. Should individuals be legally required to notify an overpayment by Government? The Department of Social Protection indicates that approximately 6% of overpayments made to welfare recipients are as a result of departmental error. I am not sure whether there is a legal obligation to inform of overpayment by the Government if one gave the correct details to the Department of Social Protection, but if not, should there be a legal obligation? I mention it because it gives rise to a problem of ethics, honesty and also cost to the State. Senator Mullen's proposal and legislation is worthy of much more consideration. I support what Senator Darragh O'Brien suggested, that we would pass the Bill on Second Stage and promise to investigate whether we could improve it on Committee Stage. I understand the Minister's concern about the difficulty small businesses have with the extent of legislative controls that exist, but the Bill is the right way to go. It is just a question of whether we could tamper with it to the extent of improving it.