Mr. Lorcan O'Connor:

I am satisfied that this legislation is sufficient to put in place the type of solutions needed to tackle these personal insolvency difficulties. If I was not satisfied I would not have taken up the job because effectively I would have been signing up to something that would be set up for failure. Equally, it is not skewed, to use the Deputy's phrase, either in favour of the debtor or the creditor because what we are dealing with here is a voluntary arrangement to try to bring together two opposing sides to reach a compromise that is in the interest of all parties.

Regarding debt write-off, I understand the reason banks would publicly state that they will not write off debt in any large manner. Equally, I would point out that in very many cases problem loans currently in arrears could be dealt with short of any debt write-off. That might mean terms are extended, interest rates are reduced or other measures are put in place. However, situations will arise where somebody is insolvent and the only solution to his or her problem involves debt being written off, and a practitioner is only doing his or her job if the proposal in those circumstances includes debt being written off. If the bank or any other creditor votes down that arrangement for the reason that debt is being written off, in all likelihood the person will go to bankruptcy and in bankruptcy all the negative equity is written off, which could be much more substantial than what a practitioner is proposing. Whatever about statements that might be made, when they have a proposal from a practitioner in front of them they must look at what the alternative might be, and in bankruptcy it is likely that far more debt will be written off. I would be confident, therefore, that these arrangements would be passed.