Professor Philip Lane:

The downside is that there is an extra cost to those who want to buy a portfolio of Irish loans. It is not an infinite cost but they will have to go through the process of setting up a legal entity here in order to do so. I am not saying it is a gigantic cost but it is a cost. I do not see an upside in terms of delivering a different outcome for customers. My honestly held view is that I do not think anything extra will be gained. This is also the conclusion across Europe and that is why this European directive is there. That is important. It would put us in an unusual position where the State would be saying it is deviating from this emerging European norm by not only regulating credit servicing but regulating the owners. We will live with any legislation that is passed. We can think about the practical consequences of that but it will not change the fundamental which is that mortgages operate within a legal framework. We have a responsibility in terms of fair process through codes. We can all look at the insolvency process where a lot has happened and ask what else can be done there but in the end that legal framework will not be changed based on whether these ultimate owners are regulated or not because what does that mean?

It means that they will set up a legal entity here. The ultimate shareholders of everything can be global. Ownership is about the behaviour of the regulated entity. Regardless of whether it is a credit servicing firm or becomes a retail credit firm, ultimately it has to comply with our codes. That is already true for credit servicing firms. It is not the case that consumer protection will differ if we require those who wish to buy up loans to become regulated here. That would not provide anything extra.