Seanad debates

Wednesday, 15 December 2021

Companies (Corporate Enforcement Authority) Bill: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

10:30 am

Photo of Lynn RuaneLynn Ruane (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 26, to delete lines 23 to 37.

The purpose of this amendment is to remove the possibility that the authority might anonymise published details of certain individual cases in respect of "the relevant sanction imposed on the relevant director [where] such publication would be disproportionate" or where "the Authority is of the opinion that the publication of those particulars in accordance with subsection (1) would jeopardise the stability of financial markets or an ongoing criminal investigation" or "the Authority is of the opinion that the publication of those particulars in accordance with subsection (1) would cause disproportionate damage to the relevant director."

To put these provisions in context, the authority will be given the ability to anonymise particulars in order to protect directors who have committed crimes potentially involving millions of euros as it sees fit while my colleagues and I are dealing with hard-working, honest members of the public who may have committed minor crimes at some time in the past. I am talking about offences as simple as robbing a sliced pan, not having a television licence or breaking a shop window. These offences may have occurred at any stage in people's lives but they cannot move on or get a job. Their lives, their communities and their families are damaged because these offences still appear on Garda vetting forms. It seems that while we are all equal in the eyes of law, some are more equal than others. The removal of this subsection and the acceptance of this amendment would ensure that the integrity of the authority is maintained.

The Minister of State will argue that these provisions will be used sparingly but while general and imprecise language such as "would cause disproportionate damage to the relevant director" remains in the Bill, the clause remains open to abuse by those who wish to and, more importantly, have the means to, remain anonymous. Who is to decide what is considered proportionate damage to a director? During the Dáil debate on this matter, the Minister of State mentioned that the decision as to who is entitled to anonymity will be made by the authority's new director. I am afraid that such a system inherently leaves the door open to abuse, especially when we consider the scale of the financial resources available to the companies this authority is set to audit. I urge the Minister of State to consider this amendment in order to strengthen the powers and legitimacy of the authority and to maintain its integrity.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.