Seanad debates

Friday, 24 July 2020

Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Covid-19) Bill 2020: Second Stage

 

10:00 am

Photo of Robert TroyRobert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank all Senators for their kind words. I hope they will always be as kind to me when I come before the House in the future. I will appreciate it for today.

Senators Ahearn and Lombard referred to the July stimulus package. It is an ambitious project and of real substance. It comes to €5 billion, or €7 billion if one takes into account the credit guarantee scheme. Some people are disappointed that not everything has been achieved. It is, however, the singular biggest injection to support business in the history of the State. There should be no mistake about it. When one listens to some Members talking about protecting companies, it seems companies and businesses are bad. Businesses create jobs and wealth. They ensure taxes are paid and the wealth can be reinvested to ensure the provision of core services. It is important to recognise that. I accept there are some rogue businesses. By and large, however, most businesses are run by good, honest people who are doing good work. They are captains of industry creating opportunities for the citizens of the State. We should stop knocking people who are creating jobs and are wealth creators. We need those people investing in our country.

Senators Lombard, Gavan and Bacik referred to co-operatives.A general scheme for the co-operative societies Bill is being prepared by the Department. It will provide co-operative societies with a distinct legal legislative identity, reflecting their ethos, reduce the number of members required to form a co-operative, revise the provisions of debentures, introduce audit exceptions in line with the approach taken in the Companies Act 2014, as well as strengthening governance provisions and revising the powers of the Registrar of Friendly Societies. I acknowledge it is long overdue. A large body of work was done with the 2014 Companies Act, which took a long time in the Department. Attention has now been focused on this area. I gave a commitment in an oral question a number of weeks ago in the Dáil that, as it falls under my responsibility, I will happily work with all parties to ensure we get proper legislation that will meet all our aspirations. It is my intention that this will be introduced in the Oireachtas before the end of this year or, at the latest, early in the new year.

Senator Byrne referred to the accelerated use of technology. We must acknowledge that Covid-19 has demonstrated how much we can better use technology. This interim period until the end of December will act as a pilot basis to see how well it works. I have no doubt it will work very well and efficiently. It will give us an opportunity to see how it works on a pilot basis and how we can make it more permanent. There is an interdepartmental group on the digital economy and how it will advance over the next several years. Digital is the responsibility of many Departments. I am led to believe that I am going to be the chairman of the interdepartmental group. There are moves under way on a national digital strategy which will provide an opportunity for all Members, wider society and stakeholders to feed into that digital strategy, which is important.

I acknowledge Senator McDowell's vast experience in the legal profession and the work he has done in this area. While I take on board much of what he said, there is an urgency that this Bill is enacted, which he will appreciate. There is one permanent amendment in this legislation providing for the substitution of the Workplace Relations Commission for the Employment Appeals Tribunal. We are working to have the co-operative societies legislation brought forward, streamlined and fit for purpose. A large body of work was done back in 2014. I will ask my officials if there is any way possible to examine Senator McDowell's proposal. I am not sure there is, however, given the time constraints with this legislation.

Senator Gavan and I had a good working relationship on the Council of Europe and we became friends as a result. I understand that in certain instances that he is coming from a different perspective and different outlook on life. That is good. It is important that there is always somebody on that side of the House to challenge and hold people on this side of the House to account. The Government is only good as its Opposition. An Opposition has a strong role to play in democracy and holding people to account.

I disagree fundamentally on Senator Gavan's contention about the July stimulus, however. We need business. Just because one is pro-business does not mean one is anti-employee. One can be supportive of both.Mention was made of people working in meat plants and other places where, because of the nature of the work, they have ended up in clusters. Obviously, the protection of employees is very important. That is why a huge body of work was done, particularly with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the HSA, to bring forward protocols to ensure the protection of employees. I heard two different figures, 67 and 400, with regard to people working in the HSA. I will undertake to look at how many are there. I know when I was on the other side of the House I raised the very same point on the need for more inspectors to be on the ground in the few cases where people do not feel they have to comply with the protocols that have been laid out. These protocols have been painstakingly gone through with ICTU, IBEC and various stakeholders and it is important they are adhered to. I will check out exactly how many people there are and will respond to the Senators directly on this.

I am conscious Senator Bacik, as well as Senator McDowell, has high legal qualifications and expertise and I will be guided somewhat by what they have said. Senator Bacik raised an issue, and I am glad she did because it gives me an opportunity to clarify, with regard to the codifying of directors' duties. It is something I would have liked to have seen in the Bill because we need to ensure directors' duties are explicitly stated. It was intended to progress a third recommendation on the codification of directors' duties to creditors as part of the Bill but constitutional concerns about the provision were raised by the advisory council so further examination is required before it is capable of being progressed further. Given the fact it was going to be a permanent amendment it was felt to be more prudent to give it further consideration. Certainly it is something of which I am supportive and I will be looking at how to include it as an amendment in further legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.