Brian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The fourth grouping relates to provisions in the Seanad Bill that, by requiring the unpaid subcontractor to return to work after two weeks even though he or she might not be in receipt of payment for work carried out, favoured the main contractor. Everyone accepted this as fact. The provisions were amended to provide for suspension of work following seven days' notification in writing. This suspension can continue until referral of the payment dispute for adjudication, and following an adjudicator's award where the award has not been paid. The amendment provides for a more balanced solution that, while not prejudging the outcome of a payment dispute, allows this issue to be resolved.

There is universal agreement that what we have done in this context has dealt with one of the key issues raised by subcontractors in the course of the regulatory impact assessment - that is, allowing people to return to work while the dispute is being resolved. This was not the case in the original draft and is a significant improvement.

The fifth grouping comprises amendments 9 to 11, inclusive. These are technical amendments to remove the provision in section 6(2) that is already provided for in section 2(5)(b), which reads:

This Act applies to a construction contract whether or not-- [...](b) the parties to the construction contract purport to limit or exclude its application.

This was mistakenly repeated in section 6(5).

Regarding amendments Nos. 10 and 11, at the start of Second Stage in the Dáil, I mentioned the helpful contributions of both main Opposition spokespersons, those from Sinn Féin and Fianna Fáil, in respect of the RIA. This was the first legislation on which a RIA was conducted. I invited to those discussions both main Opposition spokespersons. They were around the table with me and we listened to the industry's opinions. I have attempted to take as broad an approach as possible.

This consultation highlighted a number of matters relating to the Bill that required further consideration, chief among those being the provision that limited the effectiveness of the adjudication process by making the adjudicator's award binding, provided the award was not appealed. This measure was included to provide protection to the State in the event of insolvency of the payee.

During Second Stage, a number of Deputies asked to have the adjudicator's award made binding - that is, payable even if the award was appealed to arbitration. I accepted these concerns. The amendment before the Seanad is the response to those issues. It means that adjudication will be binding and will apply equally to private and State contracts.

The adjudication provisions contained in the Bill are vital to its proper functioning. In a sense, they give the legislation the necessary teeth to provide a swift and cost-effective means of dispute resolution.

Amendment No. 11 is required to remove section 7(3), which states that work may not be suspended if the adjudicator's award is not binding. Since the non-binding aspect of the adjudicator's award has been removed in amendment No. 10, this subjection is no longer necessary.