I will come back to that in a moment.

If the Minister of State is saying that it is intended there will be a duty of full disclosure, I do not see why the amendment is not being accepted unless it is regarded as redundant because of what is already in the Bill.

The Minister of State indicated that documentation would be supplied to a person who is subject to an investigation. I do not see where that is in the Bill. I ask the Minister of State to point out precisely where it is. For instance, section 15 mentions a notice after a decision has been made by the head of financial regulation to conduct an investigation, and that the notice has a statement of the reasons for the holding of the opinion and a copy of such material on which that opinion is based. That is not all ma…

Could the Minister of State tell me where?

Section 43, for instance, states: "A draft report and final report under this section shall include any material that in the opinion of the responsible authorised officer is relevant to the consideration of the report by the Bank under section 33AO(1) or (2) or 33AR(2) or (4)." If it is being suggested that the report has to have appended to it all the relevant material that might be of assistance to the subject of the proposal to investigate, that is not very clear. In a criminal prosecution, one gets all the stat…

I was struck by section 67, which provides that leave for judicial review cannot be granted in respect of "a finding made by the Bank under section 33AQ(1) or (2) [or] a decision of the Bank imposing a sanction under section 33AQ". I presume that is because there is an appeal.

As there is an appeal, one cannot judicially review, therefore, the process that led to the appeal. The problem with that arises in the context of a possible unfairness in the process, such as the absence of compliance with a duty to disclose all documents or, alternatively, the fact that the person simply could not afford to be involved in a lengthy investigation. To say that judicial review is out means the appellate body is supposed to remedy everything - errors in process and the whole lot. Is it the intention …

If I am wrongly found guilty of a contravention and then appeal it to that body and have my lawyers there, can the tribunal at that stage award me my costs or is that all on my own account?

Fair enough. A person might have waded through blood, legally speaking, and then been exonerated. If that person is not then entitled to the costs of his or her vindication, there is something very unfair about it.

First, I note this legislation started in Dáil Éireann and is coming to this House where it will effectively be amended and it will then, apparently, be approved by Dáil Éireann. There are a few points that I would like to raise, although maybe it is a bit late to do so as it has arrived at this stage in this House. What we are doing here is conferring on the Central Bank massive powers in regard to individual persons carrying out controlled functions within any financial institution. What we are doing as well is s…

Hear, hear.

Just wait until you know somebody who is an accountable person under this legislation.

The way you are going, you will be rubbing shoulders with them all pretty soon-----

-----now that you are all wearing jackets and ties like yourself.

That is true.

Who pays for that process?

It is not agreed. We only got five minutes each. The speaking time allocated is a serious disgrace to this House.

I know the Cathaoirleach does not like me mentioning it but five minutes on this Bill is a real disgrace to this House.

Yes, and that was disgraceful too.

It shows the contempt of the person who said five minutes each is enough.