Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Well, it is and it is not. Property rights are not absolute, they are subject to the exigencies of the common good. There was a myth going on for many years, which we busted, that they were nearly absolute. People seem to have missed the saver clause in the Constitution, which is very clear. You cannot abolish property rights, but you can control them and limit them. We have seen good examples of that in the last 20 years. I hear the Minister's argument about private investors. That is an issue that needs to be tackled on another day, that is, investment in private funds. We are living in a very dangerous world. It is a matter of major concern that our money would be going, knowingly or unknowingly, into the arms industry. I do understand the complexity of this. People did not seem to understand that many years ago but I am glad that understanding has arrived.

I am glad the Minister is looking at the matter in accordance with the prudent person rule referred to in section 74(1)(a) regarding "may" or "shall". It is extraordinary that it says "may" take into account the potential long-term impact of investment decisions on environmental and social governance factors.

I hear what is being said in respect of this being looked at again. I can see why this would happen. For the life of me, I cannot understand why it is not "shall". It seems very obvious that these factors would have to be taken account of. I would hope it will be possible to perhaps go some of the way in this regard regarding this tier of investment. One way to go about this would be to put in human safety or human well-being criteria. In other words, we would not invest in something that is going to blow the whole lot of us up. Investment decisions could be made in the context of taking into account environmental, social, human well-being and governance factors. The Minister has all the resources to figure this out. I do not.