Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I indicated on Committee Stage that I would consider this amendment further and respond to the Senator on Report Stage. I have done that and I am informed that it is currently the standard practice of NERA to issue a receipt in circumstances where it is necessary to remove original documents either for copying or for use in the course of the inspection or court proceedings. It is also NERA’s standard practice to return the originals as soon as it has finished with these records.If for some reason NERA wishes to retain the original records it will give copies to the business on request. It does not issue receipts for copies of records given to it by an employer where it retains the originals. I am informed that there has never been any issue raised by employers regarding the manner in which NERA currently deals with this matter.

As I said on Committee Stage, the power given to an inspector by section 27(1)(c) to remove any such books and detain them for such period as he or she reasonably considers to be necessary for the purposes of his or her functions under the Act is an appropriate, necessary and proportionate power. I envisage that it will ordinarily be used only in cases of suspected fraud. There is nothing in section 27 which prohibits an employer from whom records are being temporarily removed from requesting an inspector to allow him or her to take copies of such records before they are removed by the inspector. It is intended that the practices in this regard, which have been successfully operated by NERA since its establishment, will also be adopted by its successor to the WRC compliance service following the enactment of this Bill. Therefore, I am satisfied that it is not necessary to put these procedures on a statutory footing.