Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Sibley and his colleagues from the Central Bank for attending. I also thank him for his opening remarks.

As Mr. Sibley will know, the Bill passed Second Stage unopposed in the Dáil last May. We are now approaching the end of the pre-legislative scrutiny phase that takes places before embarking on a detailed analysis of the Bill on Committee Stage. I have always acknowledged and put on the record on a number of occasions that it would be better if legislation was unnecessary. There has been some progress on variable rate pricing but in my view there has not been enough progress. I have acknowledged the need for banks to have sustainable business models, to be profitable and to have adequate capital levels and compared that with how a certain cohort of customers have been treated. My party and I have reached the conclusion that variable rate customers have been and are being treated unfairly. We have concluded that they have been discriminated against. We have concluded that there is no economic justification for the types of rates that continue to be charged in the Irish market on variable rate mortgage products.

My first question relates to the consumer protection code of 2012 that requires regulated entities or banks to act honestly, fairly and professionally in the best interests of their customers and the integrity of the market. Is it fair, as is required under the code, for certain banks to treat their existing variable rate mortgage customers very differently from how they treat their new customers? For example, Permanent TSB applies a significant price difference of 0.5%. Is it fair that a pillar bank like the Bank of Ireland has openly said it will keep its variable rate pricing high to encourage customers to sign up to fixed rate products? Does Mr. Sibley and the Central Bank view those types of practices as being fair on consumers in the Irish market?