Mr. Kenneth Jordan:

I thank the committee for the opportunity to present this opening statement on behalf of the Department of Rural and Community Development. As you say, Chair, the Department has been invited here today on the topic of the Private Member's Bill on safe deposit boxes and related deposits. The Minister of State, Deputy Joe O'Brien, gave a detailed statement on this in Dáil Éireann on 20 April, and I will be touching today on some of the points he made at that time.

The Bill itself is quite detailed and complex, but Parts 2, 3 and 5 are perhaps the most pertinent for the purposes of today's discussion. Part 2 contains a number of provisions. It seeks to enable the establishment of a register of property deposited in safe deposit boxes in relevant financial institutions. This register would include depositor details and information on when the property was deposited and last accessed by, or on behalf of, the depositor. These provisions are key to the proposed Bill, with the register forming the basis on which property would be defined as "unclaimed", effectively where a period of 80 years has passed since the property was accessed by the depositor. This Part of the Bill also sets out that, where items are identified as unclaimed, the institutions should take specific steps to reunite the property with its owner.

Part 2 then provides for the examination of property which remains unclaimed, by the relevant institutions, for the purposes of ascertaining the identity of the depositor. I note that the key issues around Part 2 relate to regulations on financial institutions, and place significant responsibilities on these institutions. As such, I think it is the views of those entities, and my colleagues in the Department of Finance, that are key to this Part of the Bill.

Part 3 builds on the register and steps detailed in Part 2, and covers the proposed retention by the State of unclaimed property. The provisions would require institutions to give notice to the director of the National Museum of Ireland of the details of property which remains unclaimed. The director, or a person authorised by the director, would then be obliged to make a determination as to whether the unclaimed property concerned is of historical, archaeological, or artistic importance. Items of importance can then be retained by the State, however with the rightful owners able to reclaim property at any point in the future. As with Part 2, there are detailed provisions here which do not relate to the remit of the Department of Rural and Community Development, and which will require the consideration of my colleagues in the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. I am aware, from discussions prior to the Second Reading, that there are concerns over the proposed extensive role of the director of the National Museum, for example, around the potential volume of items that may need to be considered, and regarding decisions to reunite property with rightful owners being made by the director.

Part 5 provides for the sale of unclaimed property, not retained by the State, by the institutions, in a manner that would "obtain the best price reasonably attainable". These funds would then be transferred to the Dormant Accounts Fund, net of reasonable costs incurred by the institution. In addition, cash deposits would be transferred to the Dormant Accounts Fund directly. The rightful owner can reclaim transferred funds from the relevant institution, with the funds then recouped from the Dormant Accounts Fund. This Part also provides for the disposal of items deemed to have little intrinsic value.

While it should be feasible to transfer such funds, once realised, to the Dormant Accounts Fund, there are a number of issues which need further consideration and discussion. First, how costly would the process be, and how significant are the potential funds that could be transferred to the Dormant Accounts Fund? Is it intended that the sale of items would cover all costs for the institutions, including establishing and maintaining the register, contacting customers, publishing notices, examining items etc.? If a rightful owner emerges, is it proposed they get the full market value of the item, or the value less administration and sale costs? What happens if a rightful owner demands the item that has been sold? With regard to the proposed transfer of cash deposits to the fund, is it likely that older cash deposits have more value as a collector's item and should be treated as such? How exactly would the proposed disposal of items deemed to have little intrinsic value work? Could rightful owners challenge the decision to dispose of their item, and what would happen items of historical interest but not of sufficient importance to be held in care by the State?

In discussing these issues with the Minister of State, Deputy Joe O'Brien, one option to be considered is to simplify the Bill and remove the proposed sale or disposal of items and the subsequent transfer of proceeds to the Dormant Accounts Fund. This would retain some form of register or inventory, seeking to identify owners, the completion of an inventory of unclaimed items, and an examination of items that are potentially of importance for retention by the State. Furthermore, by adding a process whereby items are valued when being examined an evidence base of the value of items would be developed, while the institutions would still retain responsibility for safekeeping of the items for now. Based on this information of what is actually deposited, and its potential value, future consideration could then be given to the sale and disposal of items, balancing the right to property with the public good. We feel that this would mitigate the risks around this Part of the Bill, while still allowing items of importance to be identified and displayed. As I noted at the start, the Bill is very complex, and requires further detailed consideration across the three relevant Departments.

For example, one area of specific concern is the Minister of Rural and Community Development indemnifying persons carrying out functions related to the examination of items. In closing, I thank the committee again for the invitation to attend and I would be happy to assist the committee in any questions members may have.