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

Earlier Mr. O'Connor gave an example of a house valued at €300,000 or one with a mortgage of €300,000 but valued at €100,000. A PIP proposal would see the bank recoup €200,000, so it is in the bank's interest to support the proposal. I will outline a missing element. The banks know that if a debtor or person in his or her family home takes the bankruptcy route, he or she has a good chance of losing the home. If it were Bank of Ireland then it would put forward a split mortgage for the full €300,000 and charge interest all the way through. A bank knows that its proposal is likely to squeeze more money out of the individual. Also, if there is a windfall at the end of 20 years, a bank will grab it with both hands because people are reluctant to go bankrupt and lose their family home.

Has the delegation lifted the phone to contact Mr. Boucher and ask him whether he is serious about torpedoing every single proposal that comes before his bank that involves a secured debt write-down? I am very concerned that the ISI has sat back and not taken the issue seriously enough. It is not just Mr. Boucher; two of the four main banks have said they will make the process unworkable where they can and where the veto applies.

Mr. O'Connor has said he will keep the matter under review, and I believe he is genuine, but red flags have gone up everywhere. Mr. Boucher openly made his comment at this committee. Either he is bluffing and we let things go the way they are going, or we change the legislation.