Could the Minister explain the thinking behind subsection (2), where an investigation is under way? Is the requirement to prepare a report at the end of a three month period, or successive three month periods, and make the findings of that report available as soon as is possible motivated by a feeling that that hurries the investigation to conclusion or by some other considerations that the members have a right in any event to know the progress of the investigation?
SECTION 76.
Question proposed: "That section 76 stand part of the Bill."
In this case it would be members who would have sought this investigation anyway. Because they sought it and because they are members, it is considered that they have a right to know the outcome.
In order to prevent the investigation being allowed to drag on indefinitely, the three month period is mentioned here as being one at which, if they do not get the final report, they should at least get an interim report on what has been discovered up to the time of the writing of the interim report at the end of a three month period.
I have one query for the Minister relating indirectly to what Deputy Rabbitte said. Subsection (3) states that when the company has undertaken an investigation the period for making any report prepared shall not exceed 15 days. If the company contravenes that subsection, what is the sanction?
It is in subsection (7). I am advised that "(3)" should appear between (2) and (4) in subsection (7). That is obviously an error, whether it is a printing error or a more serious error I am not sure. On the basis that it is a typographical error, I do not think it is necessary to put down a formal amendment. I suggest that "(3)" be inserted between (2) and (4) in subsection (7), line 41.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
Section 76, as amended, agreed to.