I move amendment No. 87:
In page 56, subsection (7), line 28, after "49" to insert "and 50".
SECTION 56.
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: "That section 56, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
In relation to section 56: "an interest of the spouse of a director or secretary of a company not being himself or herself a director or secretary thereof in shares or debentures shall be treated as being the director's or secretary's interests,". Surely we are talking about the laws of equality today. Why should the shares being held in the wife's name be regarded as shares of the husband? Perhaps I am reading it wrongly?
It is not, as the Deputy will see if he looks at the section, in the wife's name, it is in the spouse's name. The reason that it is necessary to specify the holdings of a spouse is because it is the easiest and most obvious way in which to evade the requirements of the section by simply putting them in the spouse's name or in the names of minor children.
It can happen where shares are transferred into a wife's name and they are not the shares of the director. We are saying that they are to be treated the same as if they were the shares of the director. This is very dangerous law in this day and age. That was all right in the dark ages but individuals are individuals today and they should be treated in their own right.
Without getting into a long discussion on contemporary public and private morals it is fair to say that if more and more obligations are placed on people who are married relative to those who for all intents and purposes are living together and not married, problems will arise. This problem has already been discussed under section 30. Deputy O'Dea made the point at the time and my notes indicate that he suggested that the words "spouse" or "cohabitee" be included. It appears that changes should be made here to ensure that we do not create a new form of second class citizen — somebody who is married to somebody else.
I have not had time to see if the definition section includes a definition of spouse. We will consider the question of what Deputy Bruton so delicately describes as cohabitee.
Male or female.
Cohabitee is neutral but not neutered obviously.
I suggest you refer the section to the Women's Rights Committee for their comments.
Question "That the section as amended, stand part of the Bill" put and agreed to.
Section 57 agreed to.