Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 13 September 2016

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach

Rising Cost of Motor Insurance: Discussion (Resumed)

11:00 am

Photo of Rose Conway WalshRose Conway Walsh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. We had already heard much of what was said in the past week from other contributors, but there are some very useful things in there. I will start with hedge cutting. If any members or witnesses have travelled the R312 from Mayo, they certainly know about the dangers of not having hedges cut, particularly in the context of high vehicles and the dangers that can arise. We have met with hauliers in Mayo to discuss that very issue and to try to get it addressed. It is a huge problem. Obviously, the austerity faced by the local authorities, all of the financial burdens that have been put on them and the way the local government fund has been eroded over the years have a direct impact. The solution is, therefore, that when the local authorities are preparing their budgets for this year, there should be a proper line in their submissions that would allow them to cut the hedges in such a way that vehicles, and the people travelling in them, will be safe on the roads. That is one matter I will again take up with Mayo County Council.

The key point, which we came across last week as well and which seems to be building all the time, relates to the uniform approach. We called it a cartel last year. I am interested in what Ms Murphy is saying and I completely agree with her assertion that if there is even a sniff of a cartel, the matter should be investigated. It appears that the data is available. Who controls that data? Where is it? Is the Government not strong enough to be able to take that data and then have the actuarial resources that are needed to be able to analyse it in order to get to the truth behind what we, as a committee, are trying to do? Again, that is something we will take away with us.

Regarding the European Single Market, again, I completely agree with Ms Murphy. I would like to discover exactly who is stopping it and where are the blockages to which one of my colleagues referred. Ms Murphy has outlined the big picture really well and the absolute threat to the economy that is being posed. We made insurance compulsory and we mandated the private sector to provide it, but it is failing to do so. It is also telling that brokers had no reply to Ms Murphy's questions about re-flagging. The insurance industry and brokers seem content to shrug off the cyclical nature of this while we just need to wait it out. Ms Murphy pointed out that the latter is not an option. It is certainly not an option for this committee. Her evidence is a reminder that it may be cyclical for the insurance industry but it is not cyclical for the rest of us.

I would like to discover the exact position regarding the 30% of operators and to establish how many of them have actually moved their operations abroad for legal or accounting purposes.

Is this being seriously looked at? The European financial services integration action plan explicitly states that an integrated financial services market should generate significant economic benefit by promoting growth and employment in conformity with the goals approved by the EU Heads of State in Lisbon in 2000. We are absolutely contravening this. Five out of the big nine insurance providers in the country are based in Gibraltar. There is a role for the Single Market in examining models to calculate the solvency of these companies. How do we know how many more will go bust in the near future? How will it leave us exposed as consumers? My insurance has increased, but I could save almost €200 if I paid it all now as opposed to running it over ten months. This makes me wonder whether the insurance company will still be here in ten months' time. Why is this €200 included as an extra cost to people who can little afford it? Those who can afford it can pay the amount up front, but why should those who cannot do so and who must spread the cost be penalised by paying an extra €200?

Has an assessment been done on the impact of Brexit? What are the main issues we need to consider? I thank Ms Murphy for her presentation, which contained much detail and very good recommendations which we can implement. I will come back in with questions for the other witnesses.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.