Section 5 resembles a section of at least one other Bill I remember in the past few months in that it has a reference to a chief officer whether described as the chief executive or otherwise. The Minister will remember I went through this matter on another occasion. In the SFADCo report there is reference to a chairman, a general manager, an assistant general manager, and so forth. There is no reference to a chief executive. I quite see the point that there may be a species of chief executive under which one can list general managers or people who run the day to day working of an enterprise. I cannot see the point—and I made this point before with the Minister on a different Bill—of having this parenthesis in the section. It is confusing. At the moment there does not appear to be anyone in SFADCo called the chief executive. If there is not, why put in this parenthesis? It is little more than a drafting point I agree.
Shannon Free Airport Development Company Limited (Amendment) Bill, 1977: Committee Stage.
The general manager is the chief executive.
Article 89 provides that the first and all subsequent appointments to the office of chief executive officer of the company and his remuneration shall be subject to the approval of the Minister after consultation as regards remuneration with the Minister for Finance. For the purposes of this article the term "chief executive officer" shall mean the person who is appointed to perform the function of a managing director or manager if no one has been appointed in either of these capacities pursuant to article 78.
Some of that may have floated over me. Is the Minister happy that combined with the section in front of him it makes the position absolutely clear?
I think it does because it defines the chief executive as managing director or manager. I understand they are now calling him the general manager. It is better to add a phrase here making it clear that irrespective of what it is called——
I agree about that. The point I was raising was: why put in the parenthesis about whether called chief executive or otherwise? As their own report shows, there is not any person in SFADCo on the door of whose office the label "chief executive" is stuck.
That is true.
I do not make any special meal of the point. I just wonder whether the parenthesis is worth having: I will leave it to the Minister.
I do not know whether it is worth having either. I do not think it adds or subtracts anything. Perhaps the House should show its independence of the parliamentary draftsmen. I propose we take out what is in parenthesis and go on.
We have already put the question to the House. We cannot go back on that.
I did not agree to the section before I heard what the Minister had to say. The Minister is now proposing—and I thank him and support his proposal—that the parenthesis be removed.
Is the Minister moving an amendment on Committee Stage that the parenthesis be removed. By agreement we can take out the parenthesis.
If it makes it easier we can do it on the next Stage.
That would make it easier to keep within the order of the House.