Vol. 414 No. 9
17 Tomás Mac Giolla asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if his attention has been drawn to the stated intention of the Confederation of Irish Industry to develop a code of business ethics; and if he will consider the introduction of a statutory code; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I am aware of the Confederation of Irish Industry's proposal to draw up a code of business ethics. Limited liability companies are the primary medium through which commercial activities are conducted in Ireland and over the years a detailed and comprehensive company law framework has been put in place. The most recent addition to the framework, the Companies Act, 1990, represents the culmination of the most fundamental review of Irish company law for decades. The Bill that preceded it received lengthy and painstaking consideration in the Oireachtas.
I am satisfied that this expanded body of company legislation, breach of which is subject to appropriate sanctions, goes as far as it is necessary in statute law. I see no objection, however, to the CII promoting a code of business ethics where they feel such a development will benefit their members and the public. However, I do not consider specific legislation in this regard to be necessary.
I am tempted to ask the Minister if he considers that the incarceration of Ministers should be precluded under the code of ethics. More specifically, does the Minister accept that there is widespread public concern about the recent revelations of business ethics as practised by a section of Irish business? Is the Minister intent on ruling out the introduction of a code of ethics on a statutory basis? The existing company legislation—admittedly some of it has been put on the Statute Book very recently—does not seem to have acted as a deterrent in certain cases that we know about.
I presume the Deputy is referring to matters that happened before the enactment of the recent legislation but which are being inquired into under the legislation. By and large it seems to me that it has not been demonstrated that there are any significant shortcomings. I have no doubt that as time passes shortcomings will come to light. Some minor shortcomings have already come to light with regard to investigations and I will make certain minor amendments to make things easier. I have no doubt that as time passes further shortcomings will come to light and I hope that amendments of company law in the future will be more frequent and shorter than the very major amendment which finally culminated in the passing of the Act in December 1990. I hope we will see a great many small amendments and by the end of 1992 one might bring forward initial updates. There will be company law being made anyway, usually outside this House, through the adoption of various EC Directives on company law. In addition, I think it advisable that Bills be brought forward from time to time dealing with specific points, or a small number of specific points, rather than major blockbusters every quarter of a century.
We will now take the final supplementary question.
Does the Minister agree that what has happened recently in the Irish business community is quite exceptional and that the vast majority of Irish businessmen create employment and pay their taxes and are a considerable asset to this country. The business community as a whole should not be labelled as dishonest tax avoiders or tax evaders, as they have been in some sections of the media and in this House over the past three months.
I am very happy to avail of the opportunity to agree with the Deputy. In so agreeing let me say that I am a little surprised that the CII thought it appropriate to say and do what they did. I think they were implying that ethics is a widespread problem in Irish business, but I believe it is not. I believe that only a small minority of people are in breach of the law.
Hear, hear.
I am not at all sure that what the CII did in these circumstances —even though I am sure they did it with the best of intentions — was really helpful.
I must move on now to information pertaining to the Adjournment debates.
May I refer to something that I wish to discuss?
There is no provision for any discussion.
I tabled a Private Notice Question today asking the Minister for Justice what steps he has taken to protect the people of Monaghan town——
Deputy Cotter will realise that the exercise on which he thought he might embark now is disorderly and futile. It gaIns nothing. We have a time limit on the next debate and I would ask the Deputy not to delay the House.
In the light of the discovery yesterday on incendiary devices I am asking for the right to comment on this.
The Deputy will not have any right to comment on it. Will the Deputy please resume his seat?
There was no protection afforded. How did the Chair arrive at the decision not to take this question?
We have not the time to allow the Deputy to be wasting the time of the House. I ask the Deputy to leave the House.
The decision was unbelievable.
The Deputy has disobeyed the Chair and I ask him to leave the House.
I will leave the House, but before I do so I wish to raise the subject matter of the incendiary devices in Monaghan town which, I have been told, lacks urgency. That is the most ludicrous decision. I welcome the opportunity, even though it is against the rules, to state that the lives of people in Monaghan, were put at risk, yet it was thought that this matter lacks urgency. It is unbelievable.
The Deputy's behaviour is unbelievable, as far as I am concerned. I will ask him again to please leave.
Deputy Cotter withdrew from the Chamber.
