Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed that the Minister is not open to accepting amendment No. 31. We all realise that the situation with individuals who have mortgages and simply cannot pay them back is not a small one. I am not talking about a number of individuals who borrowed recklessly. It is a large section of society who have found themselves with mortgages that are way beyond their means at this point in time. We all acknowledge, as the Minister of Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, did in the Personal Insolvency Act 2012, that the large number of applications that may go through that service, not to mention the banks themselves, and the targets that have been laid down by the Central Bank for arrangements reached at the end of each quarter, demonstrate that this is not a normal situation with regard to restructured mortgages.

This Bill should reflect the reality that there is a certain section of borrowers who are in this position and who should not be subject to the same rigors of this legislation. I am not trying to decrease the strength of the legislation, because it is important to protect future borrowers, the State and the institutions. I wish to provide that the register can be amended to reflect that borrowers have concluded successful restructuring arrangements, either with a bank or through the mechanisms in the Personal Insolvency Act 2012, where such arrangements have been in place and working for a 12-month period.

It is a sensible amendment and I am open to changing it. If a person fell back into arrears the situation could revert to the original. If we are talking about having a clean break, however - drawing a line in the sand for families and trying to get the banks to arrange restructuring for them so they can move on with their lives - we should reflect that in this legislation. A 12-month period would suffice in this instance, where a restructured arrangement is in place and is working. As stated in the amendment, it would then be subject to an application to be amended by the individual, rather than something that would happen automatically. I would be open to the idea that this information could be retained in some way for intelligence, as it was termed, but we need to move to give people a clean break. The five-year period for this cadre of people, who number 140,000, is onerous. It does not recognise the current situation or what the State and the Government are trying to do with both the targets and the personal insolvency legislation.