Section 95 (2) states: "Where a person convicted of an offence . . . . . . has, before the date of his conviction, initiated a transaction . . . . . subsection (1) shall not prohibit him from completing the transaction where a relevant authority of a recognised stock exchange has indicated in writing its satisfaction that . . . . . .". To whom does the exchange indicate its satisfaction?
SECTION 95.
Question proposed: "That section 95 stand part of the Bill."
It can be to the person concerned or to the Minister or to anybody else. It is simply to have some evidence that they were satisfied that it should go through.
Should it not be to the relevant authority?
They are the relevant authority.
Surely it should be the person involved because the person involved would need evidence to show that he or she was not contravening the section.
Can we change the word "has" to "can". Would that cover your reservation?
On reading the thing in full it would seem that the appropriate person to whom the communication should be given would be the registrar of the company because he is the person who will have to register the transaction.
Should it be to the company and/or to the individual concerned with the transaction?
Some phrase such as that those concerned would include the buyer and the registrar. I do not know why it was not put in more specifically.
Can we come back to it on Report Stage when you have had a chance to look at it?
All relevant bodies or all relevant——
We should get the proper wording.
I will have a look at it to see who should be put in. I agree that it is a bit vague to leave it as a requirement to do it in writing. We had better specify to whom.
On that basis, is section 95 agreed?
Question put and agreed to.