Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the committee for providing a few minutes for the switchover. I have followed some of the debate and I know the Minister has responded to some of the issues raised by the amendments. Let me add a few of my own thoughts on the matter.

First, we must remind ourselves what this Bill is and is not about. The Bill is not about some of the issues that Deputy Boyd Barrett has raised. The Bill is about making sure that when we pass this legislation through the Houses of the Oireachtas and it is enacted, every mortgage holder has the same level of protection that they had before the loan was sold to the credit servicing firm. That is the nub of what the Government wants to do here.

While the Minister, Deputy Noonan, did not use the phrase "moral hazard", he was making the point that, in a scenario where one neighbour is breaking his or her back to pay the mortgage in full and on time each month, and struggling to make ends meet, while the person next door might not be in a position to pay the mortgage although he or she is also doing the best, the Government has to take a holistic view. The Minister has made it clear that we believe the way to deal with mortgage arrears is on a case-by-case basis and by putting in place structures, supports, schemes and systems to enable assistance to be offered. Colleagues will have seen other such measures from the Government in recent weeks.

It is also important to say that there is a legally binding contract in place, the terms of which are not changing. If one has taken out a mortgage for X amount, even if the mortgage is sold to somebody else, that amount is still owed. A borrower and a lender usually enter into a lending agreement, which is a financial contract whose terms do not typically provide a borrower with the right to be informed by the lender of the value the lender attributes to the contract itself. For those fundamental reasons, I am not in a position to accept the amendment.