There are three amendments from the Seanad. Perhaps with amendment No. 1 we could discuss amendments Nos. 2 and 3, which are cognate amendments.
Restrictive Practices Bill, 1971: From the Seanad.
The Dáil went into Committee to consider amendments by the Seanad.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1:
SECTION 5.
In subsection (5), line 15, "business" deleted.
The three amendments from the Seanad are co-related. Amendment No. 1 deals with section 5. The amendment seeks to delete the word "business" in subsection (5), line 15. Section 5 (5) provides that private sittings may be held during an inquiry by the commission where it is necessary to establish matters of fact the public disclosure of which might materially injure the legitimate business interests of any person.
Amendment No. 2 is to section 6. Section 6 (4) provides that a report of an investigation by the examiner shall not contain any confidential information on a matter of fact that might materially injure the legitimate business interests of any person if the information is not essential to the full understanding of the report.
The third amendment is to section 18 (2). Section 18 (2) provides that the Minister when presenting a report of an inquiry by the commission to the Houses of the Oireachtas may omit from the report any information that might materially injure the legitimate business interests of any person if the information is not essential to the full understanding of the report.
In the Seanad it was contended that, now that the restrictive practices legislation was being extended in scope to apply to services as well as goods, the examiner and the commission might require information the public disclosure of which might materially injure persons' interests apart altogether from their business interests— for example, the interests of a doctor's patient or a solicitor's client. So, the Seanad put forward the amendments I have mentioned. I have accepted them. I feel that it is unlikely that the danger mentioned would arise but these amendments would certainly not weaken the legislation and would, in fact, provide the safeguards required.
These are wise amendments inasmuch as they ensure that people will not be seriously affected by anything that is made public and they provide greater freedom in the divulging of information to the examiner. He will not have to drag out information if it is known that the information is for his private ear. There is always the objection in matters of this kind to keeping the light under the bushel. Wisdom would dictate that the citizen and the company would be protected and that full information would be disclosed to the examiner without which he cannot carry out his functions to the satisfaction of all concerned. We on this side of the House have no objection to the amendments.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 2:
SECTION 6.
In subsection (4), line 36, "business" deleted.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amending No. 3:
SECTION 18.
In subsection (2), line 49, "business" deleted.
Question put and agreed to.
Amendments reported and agreed to.