Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for their presentation. I did not really have any doubts about the case they made on the credit union legislation. If I did, they completely persuaded me as to the merits of their case. Given all that has happened, it is really quite extraordinary that the case they are making is not having a greater impact on the Government. Lending is risky but, quite obviously, lending by institutions that are not for profit is less risky. To me, that is so self-evident that it is beyond question. The credit union movement has proven itself in that regard in the teeth of the biggest financial crisis the country has ever faced. Whatever problems it had - it had a small number - they were just a drop in the ocean by comparison with those of the profit-oriented commercial banking sector.

The entire banking system should be run like the credit union movement. For-profit banks should be put out of business. I am completely on the side of the delegates. Could they enlighten me as to why the Government is not listening? There are Members of the Houses who, in this debate and in that relating to the credit union legislation, have been falling over themselves to say how much they love the credit unions. However, they do not seem to have listened to the case the delegates made this time around and in respect of the legislation. They said that the one-size-fits-all approach and tiering proposed by the Government are not appropriate for the credit unions and are a stumbling block to the development of new services and to the sustainability of the movement. Therefore, why the hell is the Government or the Central Bank not listening? Perhaps the delegates will enlighten us as to which one is not listening. I am a bit baffled. I am shocked to my core that the Government and Central Bank have not taken up with speed and urgency a suggestion made by the credit union representatives in 2012 when what became the Credit Union and Co-operation with Overseas Regulators Act was being debated. They said they could contribute substantially to dealing with the social housing crisis.

All we hear from this Government is that it takes a few years to build houses so it cannot solve the problem immediately. The big issue that the Government always cites is that it does not have the capital upfront, but two years ago the credit unions offered the capital upfront to help solve the social housing crisis. Mr. Johnson or Mr. Farrell said that in response to the credit unions' suggestions on this, the Government said that it was only a medium-term priority. Is that really what it is saying? That is quite extraordinary. We are in an emergency situation which has been looming for two years around social housing. The credit unions offered the Government the capital on a plate. I do not know what the Government is saying. Could Mr. Farrell or Mr. Johnson elaborate on that? I am baffled that the Government considered it a medium-term issue. Could Mr. Farrell or Mr. Johnson enlighten me about what is wrong with the Government?