Amendments Nos. 57 and 58 are related and may be discussed together.
SECTION 40.
I move amendment No. 57:
In page 49, subsection (1), line 3, to delete ", stating the size of the holding" and substitute "and such notification shall include such information concerning the proposed acquiring transaction as may be specified by the Bank from time to time".
Amendments Nos. 57 and 58 amend subsections (1) and (2) of section 40 to reflect the requirements of the investment sales directive. The subsections as drafted oblige a person who proposes to make an acquiring transaction to tell the Central Bank the size of the holding he proposes to buy or sell. The Central Bank will obviously require more information than that. In particular, it will need to know whether a proposed purchase will bring the purchaser's total holding above certain critical levels, which are set out in subsection (3). Accordingly, the amendments will allow the Central Bank to specify from time to time the information which a person proposing to make an acquiring transaction or disposal must provide to the bank.
Does this arise out of the sale of Greencore shares?
No. It is a requirement of the international services directive. Certain thresholds are set down because, if one goes above certain levels, it is obvious the balance and the relative influence and control come into play. Certain levels and thresholds are set down and notification must be made if breaches of those thresholds take place. They are specified in a previous section. This relates to exchanges and not to companies quoted on the exchange. The thresholds are quite specific. They are 20,33 and 50 per cent.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 58:
In page 49, subsection (2), lines 5 and 6, to delete ", stating the size of the holding" and substitute "and such notification shall include such information concerning the proposed disposal as may be specified by the Bank from time to time".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 40, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 42.
Question proposed: "That section 42 stand part of the Bill."
Why is it left to the bank itself to set the particular period? It seems to be open to the bank to set it.
One of the allegations which has been hurled at parts of the Bill is that the bank is to be too restrictive. It was decided to allow the bank to specify a timescale within which an acquiring transaction may take place. It depends essentially on the size of the transaction and how complicated it is. Transactions involving more complex detail may take a great deal longer than others. It was decided to allow a certain amount of flexibility and discretion here.
Question put and agreed to.