Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent)

I acknowledge the role of Deputy Thomas Pringle in working on this motion and bringing it before the House.

There are many groups of people hurting in this country. One such group consists of mortgage holders who bought property in our so-called Celtic tiger years. They believed the tall stories about getting on the property ladder and that if they did not do it then, they would never get to own their own home. They believed the tall stories about 100% mortgages and that they would always be able to make the payments because they were told that the good times would last forever. They believed the tall stories about the benefits of tracker mortgages.

The expression "the dogs on the street" has been applied to a variety of situations, and it can also be applied to this situation. The dogs in the street knew that the property bubble would burst, that it was just a matter of time before it did so and that it was inconceivable to spend astronomical amounts on a house of four, five and six times its real value. The dogs on the street knew the foolishness of what was going on, yet our so called experts on banking and finance did not have their finger on the button, but actively encouraged increasing numbers of people to buy into the myth and the lie.

It is frightening to read the statistics on mortgage arrears. According to our own economic indicators carried out by the Oireachtas Library service, since September 2009 the number of mortgages in arrears has increased by approximately 18,000. At the end of 2010, there were more than 40,000 in arrears with a steady increase in the numbers of seriously distressed mortgages. It is obvious that once a mortgage becomes distressed, it becomes very difficult for the borrower to reverse that position. What is also obvious from the statistics is that the sooner the customer or borrower engages with the lender or lending institution, the better the chance that the mortgage will not become delinquent. The first strong action needed, therefore, is for everything possible to be done to ensure the lending institution engages with the borrower in difficulty sooner rather than later.

When I look at the housing section in the programme for Government, it acknowledges that the policy of putting the interests of big developers and bankers ahead of people looking to purchase a home was a direct cause of Ireland's disastrous property boom and bust. It also states that the Government is committed to helping home owners in distress to weather the recession, and it acknowledges that more protection is needed for home owners with distressed mortgages. I look at the details in our Private Members' motion and see common ground. I do not really see where there is space for the Government to vote against this and perhaps that is why there is only one member of the Government is present. They all agree with us.

We are looking for the Minister for Finance to consider emergency measures on this matter. The programme for Government states: "A more radical approach is needed to protect families in fear of losing their home", - more common ground. Part of the plan is for the money advice and budgeting service, MABS, to be converted into a strengthened personal debt management agency to support those families in dealing with their debts and provide protection and space for people to sort out their affairs. The plan is also to make greater use of the mortgage interest supplement to support families who cannot make their mortgage repayments, which it is acknowledged is a much better and cheaper option than seeing families having their homes repossessed and then going on to receive rent supplement. Other measures that can be considered include paying interest only for a significant time, paying interest on part of the capital, payment holidays, deferring all or part, lengthening the term of the mortgage, which would reduce payments, being flexible to ways of changing the type of mortgage, and a deferred interest scheme.

It is also important that the Central Bank's code of conduct on mortgage arrears be respected. Part of that code is that the lender is obliged to consider alternative repayment options while not obliged to offer one. The difficulty is where the lender states he is not willing to offer a repayment arrangement. I note the lender must give the reasons in writing and inform the borrower of other options, but it is not strong enough to prevent repossession. There is much to commend in that code but I hope the borrower can be assisted in practical ways because there is much form filling, meetings and legalities to be gone through. The code states that the aim of the mortgage arrears resolution process is to avoid the repossession of family homes.

No doubt a terrible injustice has been done to ordinary home owners by reckless and unscrupulous bankers and developers who most definitely are not facing the reality of losing their generally palatial homes, both here and abroad, in the same way that ordinary home owners are facing repossession of their homes. The Government must put ordinary citizens who are in difficulty first and not allow the banks exploit the financial situation.

See this speech in context