Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I, too, welcome the Minister of State and thank him for his very comprehensive explanation of what is a very complex Bill. Having listened to Senator Cullinane, the thought struck me that parts of the Bill are geared very much to business. I tried to search for the elements that would protect the worker associated with the company. I am sure the Minister of State will take the opportunity to address some of the issues raised by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. Having said that, I welcome the common thread running through the legislation that is making it relatively easier for somebody of an entrepreneurial bent to set up and operate businesses because there is less paperwork, red tape and less bureaucracy involved. I particularly welcome the fact that a second director is not required and that articles of association and double documents are no longer required. All of these measure were inhibiting factors. I am sure there are many other examples of measures throughout the Bill that make it relatively easy for companies. This is to be welcomed.
The Minister for Justice and Defence introduced changes to the period of bankruptcy. I, together with other Members, argued that three years was too long, when one considered that in the United Kingdom one could be discharged from bankruptcy after 12 months, which gave Irish citizens an opportunity to go there as tourists. We identified the need for the Minister to reconsider whether the bankruptcy period of three years was too long. I still believe three years is too much, especially in light of the recent revelation about personal insolvency arrangements between banks and individuals, where the banks are fast-tracking the process and reaching an arrangement with the client in a period of between three and six months. I know it is very early in the day to be asking to repeal that legislation, but it seems that the provisions of this Bill make it relatively easier for people to start a business and inevitably there will be failures. At the other end of the equation, if the failures lead to bankruptcy, then that entrepreneurial ability, and I use the word "ability", will be lost to the State. Many have given the American example that one is not successful in business unless one has failed at least once. There has been a stigma attached to people failing in business in this country but I would like to think that in recent decades, particularly in the past ten to 15 years, Ireland has greater awareness of the importance of creating business and that the entrepreneurs create jobs, which in turn contributes to the economy.
Senator Barrett has dealt with some of the issues I had wanted to raise. I found it rather interesting that the Bill rectifies the anomaly in the current legislation which presupposes that the public limited companies are the centre of corporate life in Ireland. I thought that was the case, whereas in reality fewer than 1% of companies are registered as PLCs. I am not so au faitwith business that I understand the reason. Will the Minister of State explain how the other 99% are registered? Are they private companies with share capital or private companies where the public or the law have no access to them other than within the normal company legislation?
I agree with the expressions of concern about auditing. I understand the reason the Bill suggests exemption for charities, sports clubs and small companies. The point was made that any one member of the company is entitled to object to the exemption and thus force a company to conduct an audit. I presume that protects the rights so that, even if the majority say no to an audit, under the law any one member can object. It is not a case of the majority winning out.
Would the Minister of State comment on the decision not to retain the concept of place of business? It is hoped to remove the uncertainty in the current law and oblige external companies to register as a branch if appropriate and thus be required to file accounts. While I was reading this, I was thinking about the brass plate companies which operate in the country. Does this provision apply to them? Will it tighten up the regulation of those companies who have been using Ireland but have no legal obligation to file accounts in this country? Does this refer to large multinationals? Will the Minister elaborate on it because the impression I have - please correct me if I am wrong - is that this may tighten up a particular law in that regard in light of the discussion on corporation tax, inheritance tax and the issues raised by the Governor of California last week, which I thought was bad mannered if nothing else. Perhaps he should look into his soul in respect of American tax law before he starts commenting on Irish tax law. My understanding is that the Americans are as much responsible for not getting tax from their own companies as any other country's tax regime. I would like to know the context of the external companies tax regime.
This is welcome and I applaud the Government for introducing this Bill. I wish the Minister of State every success in progressing it.