John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

To those who have been cut short at the end of this session, if they wish to come in first in the next session, I can accommodate that, because I am now going to abuse my position as Chairman and ask a few questions. Perhaps the witnesses can respond in writing. I do not want to delay the meeting.

In response to Deputy O'Callaghan, it was mentioned that credit unions are not anything like [interruptions] that they can give right now. However, credit unions would say that under the current lending limits sent by the Central Bank, they can only hope to offer just 3% of the mortgage loans and less than 10% of the SME loans in the market. There will be further commentary on the regulatory reserve ratio. The credit unions would assert the 10% is out of step with the risk profile of credit unions. In the briefing note we received from the credit union sector, it is apparent it wants to play a greater role in business loans, mortgages and so on. Quite frankly, I believe the credit union movement is the answer to our community banking question. The Central Bank should review the current position regarding credit unions. I say that to the witnesses, because customers can walk into a credit union anywhere, meet a person and get an answer. The person in the credit union will understand the customer because he or she is part of the parish the credit union represents. I think the Central Bank is missing that point.

My next question concerns the tracker mortgage investigation. A lot has been done in the investigation by the Central Bank, this committee and, indeed, others. There are issues emerging in banks that are part of the tracker mortgage question. Those who have the loans from the bank are being bullied and intimidated by the banks that granted them the loan. If that loan has been sold on in the meantime to a vulture fund, the bullying and intimidation starts then. The tracker mortgage status of these customers is not being recognised, even though they believe they should be part of the tracker mortgage issue. Even though they have gone through the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman and so on, there is evidence the banks are ignoring all of this in the final run to the finish line. They are trampling all over commercial loans, individual loans and mortgages, and they are using receivers to punch the daylights out of those who hold those loans. I have seen some reports about the activities of receivers. It would put a shiver up your spine to think they can get away with what they are getting away with.

Will the Central Bank not approach each of these banking entities and demand the accounts profile in terms of the loans that are outstanding so the bank can see for itself the issues that are being raised because of these loans by the banking entity? For example, there are allegations of fraud. In one particular case, there has been an adjustment of documents that should not have happened. I sent details of one case to the Central Bank. I followed the money from the bank to an individual associated with the bank, but not the borrower, and it ended up in the Central Bank. If the issues we raise here are not investigated, it is going to give licence to the banks to do pretty much what they want and get away with it. I am raising that as a general point. I will send details of the specific cases to Mr. Makhlouf. I honestly feel the Central Bank should take up with the banks the issues contained in the cases that are highlighted here.

On another subject, Deputy Doherty raised the issue of the banks that are closing and what is happening with all of the accounts. Are the remaining banks able to cater for those accounts? My personal experience, and the experiences that have been shared with me by others, is the banks concerned could not give a damn. Customers are left to take all of their own actions where the bank is supposed to assist and help. It is not happening. It certainly did not happen in my own case. There are many others, such as Deputy Doherty, who have come to me and complained about the fact they have had no assistance whatsoever, despite the fact this rule is in place in terms of giving assistance to the customers.

My next question concerns politically exposed persons. Will the witnesses share with the committee what written guidelines the Central Bank has provided to the banks relating to politically exposed persons? Will they provide a definition of what the Central Bank considers to be an associate of a politically exposed person? Again, the experience of parliamentarians and others is we are being treated like criminals.

The way banks are behaving is shocking. It is not just affecting individuals but it is also affecting staff members, associates and family members. I do not think it was ever intended to do that. I am all for regulation, transparency and accountability, but crucifixion does not come into it and that is what they are into. I mention receivers and the switching code, which were referred to earlier. Does the Central Bank have any role with the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation, IBRC? Does it come under the Central Bank's banking resolutions?