Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Chairman will be glad I am coming to a conclusion, but I could go on for a long time on this issue, having met representatives of KBC on numerous occasions during which we had many robust exchanges. I do not wish to go into that but I will register my points. Why and where was it thought Irish mortgage holders would be punished to the extent of being removed from the ability to enjoy the provision already made for tracker mortgages?

I strongly object to that.

I know KBC has sold on what it considers impaired mortgages. I am familiar with the conclusion reached in most cases that the mortgages in these cases were not sustainable. That was an arbitrary declaration by the bank based on a box-ticking exercise drawn up by all the banks, to which I also strongly object. There is no arbitration in that whatsoever. There is no attempt being made to accommodate the various possibilities, except on the basis of the bank's assessment of the situation.

The bank will still retain some interests in this country after its withdrawal. Mr. Blažek might mention some of the interests it will retain. I understand that is the case also with other banks leaving the jurisdiction. Is this a cherry-picking exercise or is it to maintain a foothold in the market?

Has Ireland become a place where banks do not wish to do business or cannot make sufficient profit on the basis of the size of the market? I again emphasise that all banks have a right to operate throughout the European Union, but they do not have the right to declare the manner in which they operate in certain sectors of the European Union. Otherwise, again, the Single Market applies. It must be absolutely clear from everybody's point of view that if an institution, whether a bank or other, sets up in this country, it is setting up in part of the European Union and the rules apply and they cannot and should not be changed.