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

May I ask the witnesses a question? I will understand if they cannot give an opinion on it because it is taking them down a line that is not clear in respect of the legislation or its intention. In the context of how the application of this proposal would mean it would be the responsibility of the servicers, the Central Bank has just adjudicated on the Provident moneylending scandal and in my view its adjudication was not appropriate. I was involved with the whistleblowers who provided the dossier to the Central Bank more than 18 months ago. One point of interest relevant to this legislation is that each of those people who service the debt and who make credit available to individuals are self-employed. They are not employed by Provident and are not employed by moneylenders. Therefore, a question arises in respect of credit servicers with this legislation. They are unregulated. While the statement by the Central Bank states the Central Bank found against Provident in respect of 105 loans, the self-employed people would tell one there were thousands of them. The Central Bank found against Provident not because it happened but because it did not have the rules and practices in place to identify it. The individuals who carried it out were self-employed, not employed by Provident and consequently were third parties. This relates to the question FLAC raised with regard to those who service credit in respect of hire purchase. Do the witnesses perceive an issue whereby this Bill should be expanded to deal with those areas? Alternatively, should it simply try to do what it says on the tin, that is, to deal with the loans that have been sold on and then to deal with consumer protection on a wider scale at a later stage?