Paul Bradford (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and apologise for not participating in the earlier Stages of the legislation but, notwithstanding that, I want to raise with him how this proposal and these amendments will impact on whistleblowers in banks throughout the country. As we all know, the protection of whistleblowers in our banking institutions is very important as we hopefully see the beginning of a new economy and a new banking structure, system and ethos. The Minister will be aware that the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013 provides a certain level of protection for whistleblowers within certain banking structures but it does not provide the same level of protection as is provided for within this legislation.

We are dealing in these amendments with public bodies and a public body is defined as "a company ... a majority of shares in which are held by or on behalf of a Minister of the Government". I am sure the Minister will be in a position to confirm that the provision would therefore apply to AIB, Permanent TSB and NAMA but significantly it would not apply to Bank of Ireland, presumably because the majority of the shares in it are not held by the Minister on behalf of the Government.

In that regard, there will now be two types of bank employees from the point of view of protection under this Act. Bank employees in AIB, Permanent TSB and in other financial institutions such as NAMA will have the full support and protection of the Minister's proposed legislation but it will be different for employees in Bank of Ireland. Section 38 of the Central Bank Act is being amended to ensure that protected disclosures, as prescribed in this Act, are protected in banks, but why would we simply not repeal the particular section of the Central Bank Act and replace it by the current definition which the Minister is preparing this afternoon? While his proposals are welcome and a very significant step forward, there will still be this anomaly particularly within the Bank of Ireland which will not have the same reporting obligations as far as my reading of the legislation and its definitions are concerned.

It is a worry that there will be that difference between what employees feel obliged to do in one banking institution as opposed to other financial institutions. The necessity to support and assist whistleblowers in our financial institutions is accepted by all of us. Even at this stage, could the Minister contemplate, by way of further legislation, the repeal of section 38 of the Central Bank Act and its replacement by the type of legislation presented here today, in order that all employees in all our financial institutions, which are public bodies, but also banks which are not deemed to be public bodies will have the same protection and feel equally safe in coming forward to highlight wrongdoing which they consider is being practised?