Professor Philip Lane:

From the perspective of those customers who are in that situation, the perception of unfairness is there but in the end, this is a commercial market. It is a commercial mortgage market where we advocate, through consumer protection, having as much transparency as possible, as much information as possible, and extra protections for those in arrears. One now sees in the mortgage market all sorts of different offers which, I do not disagree, are hard to process. How does one compare all of these different offers? There is definitely a challenge in that regard but that is the nature of a commercial mortgage market.

On the cash back, no doubt there is a potential risk to some consumers. For others, there is a value. People's lives are different, for instance, there is the value of saying that one accepts one will pay more over the long run but one accepts that because one's short-run needs are such that the cash back is valuable to him or her. In other words, there is a trade-off that maybe it would protect some types of households who are genuinely making an error and not properly calculating the cost, but others can make that calculation and with full eyes open decide cash back is their preference. There is a global debate about behavioural finance, not only in terms of paternalism but in terms of at least ensuring there is enough information and transparency, and having online calculators so that people can plug the numbers in as easily as possible. That is where the balance is. Maybe Mr. Sibley will add something.