Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 May 1999

Vol. 504 No. 5

Companies (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 1999 [ Seanad ] : Committee and Remaining Stages.

SECTION 1.

Amendment No. 2 is consequential on amendment No. 1 and amendment No. 3 is cognate. The amendments may be taken together.

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, subsection (1)(a), line 22, to delete "the earliest public announcement" and substitute "the trading commences".

If ever we needed a gap between Second Stage and Committee Stage of a Bill it is now. I am not sure I understand some of the English used by the Minister of State, let alone the terminology. I hope for his sake those who drafted the legislation are fully aware of what they are doing and that we do not find ourselves in a dilemma during the flotation of Telecom Éireann, the first company to be affected by this legislation. I am still not clear whether the Minister of State answered my question as I have not had time to tease out his answer. Perhaps his officials might be able to reassure me later that my concerns have been dealt with.

My concern on section 1 is that the Minster of State said that the 30 day period commences on the day of the earliest public announcement of such issues or offers made which states the issue or offer price. My concern is that there might be a difference between the time of the announcement of the price and the time at which trading starts. I recognise that trading will start at the price announced but the price could change instantly. I would have thought that the 30 day stabilisation period should commence at the date of trading if it is not the same as that on which the price was announced.

I may be reading this wrong. Section 1(b) seems in conflict with section 6 but we do not have time to tease that out. Perhaps the Minister will be able to reassure me that these amendments are not necessary. If ever there was a reason for bringing each new regulation before the House to be agreed, it is the speed with which this Bill has been dealt with and the lack of detailed examination. If ever there was a need for the Minister to accept an amendment, it is in the context of this legislation. I am deeply disappointed that the Minister will not accept my amendment to section 5.

Deputy Owen would be correct if this legislation were for Ireland alone. We are dealing with international practice. There are exchanges throughout the world in different time zones and there would be ample opportunity for manipulation if we did not have one standard whereby, once we announce it, stabilisation takes place everywhere in the world.

As it is now 10.30 p.m. I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That sections 1 to 7, inclusive, the Schedule and the Title are hereby agreed to in Committee, that the Bill is reported to the House without amendment, and that Fourth Stage is hereby completed."

Question put and agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

In passing this legislation, I feel as if I have been pulled through a hedge backwards in the sense of the rush with which it had to be agreed. I cannot stress enough that I hope for the Minister's sake this legislation has been carefully drafted. Why was the Minister not advised long before now that it was needed? If the Minister has known since the beginning of the year, why was the effort put into publishing the Companies (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill which we has not been taken in this House? Why did he not introduce this Bill and give us at least a couple of weeks to examine it? It would have been much better parliamentary practice. I urge the Minister not to do anything similar again and to give the Opposition an opportunity to examine legislation.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share