Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Select Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, and Taoiseach is meeting today to consider Committee Stage of the Credit Review Bill 2024. I will bring some matters to the attention of members. Any member acting in substitution for a member of the committee should formally notify the clerk if she or he has not already done so. Divisions will be taken as they arise. Members must attend in person in the committee meeting room for the divisions, although they may attend the general meeting remotely. Members attending this meeting in accordance with Standing Order 103(8) should be aware that, pursuant to that Standing Order, they may move amendments but cannot participate in voting on those amendments. Does the Minister of State, Deputy Troy, wish to make an opening statement?

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Chair and committee for agreeing to take this Bill and facilitating me with this date. Credit Review was established in 2010 to assist viable SMEs and farm businesses in obtaining credit from the participating banks, namely, AIB, Bank of Ireland and PTSB. It provides an appeals mechanism whereby a prospective borrower, whose application for credit has been declined, can apply for a review to the credit review service. The service provides an assessment of the business case for a loan and the borrower’s creditworthiness and makes a recommendation to the lender on that basis. The decision whether to grant a loan will always be a commercial decision, so the lender is not obliged to accept the reviewer’s recommendation but must explain the reasons for this decision. Since its establishment in 2010, the credit reviewers’ recommendations have resulted in banks agreeing to make €86 million in credit available to SMEs and farm businesses.

Credit Review also publishes information for SMEs on credit-related issues and regularly gives expert advice on SME lending by banks to my Department and other stakeholders. The purpose of the Credit Review Bill 2024 I am here to discuss today with the committee is to place the service on a firm statutory basis. There is also provision for an expanded role in the future, should the evolution of the SME credit market justify that.

The Bill will establish the body, to be known as the credit review service, on its own statutory footing. It will replicate matters currently set out in the regulation SI 127 of 2010; codify procedures which have developed as practice over time and will provide a means to extend the lenders subject to Credit Review to other classes of regulated financial service providers if the Minister considers that necessary in light of a future changing market for SME credit. The feedback from the consultations on the Bill with relevant stakeholders was positive.

As far as possible, the Bill seeks to maintain the current practices of Credit Review. The Bill is divided into 38 sections over five Parts. Part 1 deals with preliminary and general matters, including definitions, the prescribing of the loan amounts that are subject to review by the service and the regulation powers. I intend to bring forward a number of technical amendments to Part 1 on Committee Stage to allow for the prescribing of a minimum amount to ensure that credit unions are not immediately in the scope of the Bill, which was always the policy intention; and to ensure that borrowers who receive a credit decision shortly before the establishment day are not prevented from applying for a review of that decision in the transition to the new service.

Part 2 provides for the establishment of the new service and contains the standard provisions for the establishment of a new statutory body to ensure that it complies with appropriate standards of corporate governance. It provides for the designation of an establishment day and specifies the functions of the service and the credit reviewer. It provides for the employment and secondment of staff, as well as accountability to the Minister and committees of the Oireachtas, including through the preparation of specified reports and accounts that are subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor General. I intend to bring forward a technical amendment to section 16 to ensure that any dispute in relation to superannuation benefits can be resolved effectively, having regard to the small size of the body.

Part 3 sets out the process by which the service will conduct the review of credit decisions. It provides for the circumstances in which credit decisions will be eligible for review. It also provides for the funding of the service through a combination of application fees and a levy to be paid by the lenders whose credit decisions are subject to review. This will replicate the existing funding model. There is also provision for the service, at the request of the Minister, to undertake a review of the lending practices and policies of lenders whose decisions are subject to review by the service. I am bringing forward a number of technical amendments to Part 3 to ensure that the provisions operate as intended.

Part 4 includes provisions to ensure that the transition from the existing Credit Review to the new service is completed as smoothly as possible with due regard to the rights and interests of all parties concerned.

Part 5 makes technical consequential amendments to other enactments.

In summary, this Bill is largely a technical endeavour to create a stand-alone legislative basis for the credit review service, a body that, since 2010, has provided valuable services to SMEs and farm borrowers. I commend it to the committee and look forward to discussing its provisions with it in greater detail now.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 1, 3 to 6 inclusive, 8, 14, 45 and 47 are all related and may be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, line 28, to delete “section 20” and substitute “sections 20, 21, 25 to 30 and 32”.

Amendment No. 1 is the first of a number of technical amendments to the Bill, which I propose to discuss together. It amends the definition of "application" in section 2 so that it does not apply to sections that refer to different kinds of application. Application, as defined in section 2, means an application by a borrower who is applying for a loan. The word "application" is used differently in sections 20, 21, 25 to 30, inclusive, and section 32. Section 20 refers to an application to the High Court. Sections 21, 25 to 30, inclusive, and 32 refer to an application to the credit review service for review of a credit decision. Therefore, I propose an amendment to expand the exclusions to the definition of "application".

Can I speak to amendment No. 3 and move it at the same time?

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State does not need to move it yet. We will come to moving it but he is speaking on all of those amendments together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendment No. 3 deletes the definition of "credit facility documentation" as the term is not used elsewhere in the Bill. Amendment No. 4 amends the definition of "credit institution" to exclude "credit unions". The intention of the Bill is to replicate the existing scope of the credit review office, which does not currently include credit unions. The definition of "credit institution" in the Bill as initiated, however, also includes credit unions so that needs to be corrected.

Section 2(2) and section 2(3) allow for the Minister for Finance to broaden the scope of the service to other regulated financial service providers in the future, should that be necessary. This will allow for developments that may take place in the SME lending market so that institutions that represent significant proportions of that market may be brought into scope following consultation with relevant bodies.

I note the recent changes to the credit union lending regulations by the Central Bank to expand credit union business lending concentration limits to 15% of total assets, which took effect on 30 September 2025. While it is expected this may increase the amount of credit union lending to the SME sector, there are no immediate plans to bring credit unions into the scope of the Bill. Department officials and the credit review service will continually monitor the development of the SME lending market and review the matter for further consultation, based on the parameters set out in section 2(2) and section 2(3). If it appears to the Minister that the development in the market of SME credit justifies extending the scope of the credit review service to other classes of lenders that are regulated by the Central Bank, the Minister may, after appropriate consultation, prescribe those classes of lenders as a relevant person.

The Bill sets out a range of factors of which the Minister must take account when deciding to prescribe a new class or classes of lender as relevant persons whose credit decisions are subject to review by the credit review service. These include the extent to which demand by SMEs for credit has been met, the importance to SMEs of a particular type of credit provided by the class of lenders concerned and the amount of credit provided by SMEs by that class of lender.

Amendments Nos. 5 and 14 relate to section 6 and are drafting amendments that give SI No. 127 of 2010 in sections 2 and 6 its full title.

Amendment No. 6 deletes the definition of "higher purchase agreement" as this term is not used elsewhere in the Bill.

Amendment No. 8 is a technical drafting amendment to insert a reference to section 2(1).

Amendment No. 45 changes a reference to "this Act" in section 32 to a reference of Part 3 and provides that the Part which deals with the review of credit decisions and lending practices shall apply in respect of an application for review, where a recommendation in relation to that application has yet to be made at the time the guidelines are revoked. This will allow the new service to continue any unfinished cases on which the existing credit review office is working at the time the new service is established.

Amendment No. 47 inserts a new section, section 38, to provide for consequential amendments to the Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017. These amendments remove references to the "credit reviewer" and substitute references to the new service.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 2, 7 and 9 are related and may be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 6, line 37, to delete “an amount not greater than the prescribed amount” and substitute the following: “an amount not less than the prescribed minimum amount and not greater than the prescribed maximum amount”.

This is one of three amendments to the Bill to provide for prescribed minimum and maximum amounts, together with amendments Nos. 7 and 9. Currently, the credit review office reviews applications for credit between €1,000 and €3 million. It is proposed the same parameters will apply to the applications to the new service, although the Minister may change these by statutory instrument, should that be appropriate in the future. The Bill currently provides for a prescribed maximum amount but not for a minimum amount. These amendments provide for a prescribed minimum amount, in relation to which a review can be conducted by the service. This will ensure the resources of the service are not wasted in dealing with relatively trivial disputes and will also have the benefit of providing clarity to borrowers and prospective applicants to the service.

Amendment No. 2 amends the definition of "credit facility" to allow the prescribing of a minimum amount in relation to an application for credit that shall be eligible for the application to the service for review of a credit decision.

Amendment No. 7 deletes the definition of a "prescribed amount" and substitutes definitions of "prescribed maximum amount" and "prescribed minimum amount".

Amendment No. 9 replaces section 3. While the existing section provides only for a prescribed maximum amount, the replacement section provides for both a maximum and minimum amount. The amendment also adds to the factors to which the Minister is to have regard in prescribing these amounts. They need to ensure effective and efficient use of the resources available to the service.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 7, to delete lines 4 to 12.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 7, line 15, after “2013” to insert the following: “, other than a credit union registered as such under the credit union Act 1997 or deemed to be so registered by virtue of section 5(3) of that Act”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 7, to delete lines 22 and 23 and substitute the following: “ “Guidelines” means Guidelines Issued Under Section 210(1) of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 Regarding Lending Practices and Procedures and Relating to the Review of Decisions of Participating Institutions to Refuse Credit Facilities (S.I. No. 127 of 2010);”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 7, to delete lines 24 and 25.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 7, to delete line 29 and substitute the following:

“ “prescribed maximum amount” means an amount prescribed by the Minister under paragraph (b) of section 3(1);

“prescribed minimum amount” means an amount prescribed by the Minister under paragraph (a) of section 3(1);”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 8, line 6, after “ “relevant person” ” to insert “in subsection (1)”.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This section deals with definitions and the guidelines, in this legislation, are defined as SI 127 of 2010. Can the Minister of State clarify that the credit reviewer is one person appointed by the Government?

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to advise that it looks like the Finance Bill will start in ten minutes in case Deputy Doherty want to focus on the amendments.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, I am going to have to deal with the Finance Bill, unfortunately.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I can gladly come back to the Deputy.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister is very glad.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Doherty has amendments in the next section.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Deputy want to dwell on this?

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am okay. With the indulgence of the committee-----

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With one person.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----can I make three broad points about the Bill as I am about to leave? I have tabled amendments but I intend to withdraw them and perhaps may resubmit them on Report Stage.

First, four years have elapsed since the Government granted approval for the credit review office to be put on a statutory footing, which shows the slowness of change in government. I think it was on 6 July 2021 that the Cabinet approved the credit review office to be put on a statutory footing, which I support.

Second, what the review office deals with came from the NAMA legislation and a large portion of SMEs do not go to banks any more. More than 30% of SMEs get lending from non-bank lenders. Therefore, the credit review office in this legislation has to look at that aspect also.

Third, and this next issue concerns one of the amendments that I will withdraw, there is a large contraction in relation to credit being available to SMEs. I have individual cases that I will not put on the record but I know of people literally being put out of business because of lending practices that they feel are not appropriate. We have the Central Bank has given us statistics on the tightening of lending practices, of which the credit review office is one part. I welcome and support the legislation but it is a small contribution to an overall issue. I do think we need to consider the lending environment in relation to banks that are very profitable and how they are making it very difficult for SMEs to access credit. I also believe that the scope of this legislation should look at non-bank lenders and the fact that so many SMEs are now having to go to non-bank lenders because they find it easier and more accessible to get credit from them.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will temporarily vacate the Chair so that I can move the amendments and withdraw them so that they can be discussed on Report Stage.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Perfect. Thank you.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 8, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:

“Prescribed minimum and maximum amounts

3. (1) Subject to subsections (2), (3) and (4), the Minister shall, for the purposes of the definition of “credit facility” in section 2, prescribe—

(a) a minimum amount, and

(b) a maximum amount.

(2) An amount prescribed under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) shall be not less than €1,000.

(3) An amount prescribed under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) shall be not greater than €5,000,000.

(4) In prescribing an amount under paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (1), the Minister shall have regard to—

(a) the level of demand by borrowers for credit of amounts ranging between the amount proposed to be prescribed under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) and the amount proposed to be prescribed under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) and the extent to which such demand is being met,

(b) the importance to borrowers and the economy of the State of borrowers being able to obtain credit of amounts ranging between the amount proposed to be prescribed under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) and the amount proposed to be prescribed under paragraph (b) of subsection (1),

(c) the amounts of credit being provided to borrowers and any trends in the amounts so provided,

(d) the economic conditions prevailing in the market for provision of credit to borrowers, and

(e) the need to ensure the effective and efficient use of resources available to the Service.”.

Edward Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 10 to 13, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 10:

In page 8, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:

“Report on level of cooperation from banking sector

3. The Minister shall, within 3 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the level of cooperation from the banking sector in terms of adopting the recommendations made by the Credit Review Service.”.

I will withdraw the amendment with the intention of resubmitting it on Report Stage.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 8, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:

“Report on increasing reliance of SMEs on non-banking sector for finance

3. The Minister shall, within 3 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the increasing reliance of SMEs on the non-banking sector for finance and the impact this has on the role of the Credit Review Office.”.

I will withdraw the amendment with the intention of resubmitting it on Report Stage.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 8, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:

“Report on performance of banking sector in providing affordable and suitable finance to SME sector

3. The Minister shall, within 3 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the performance of the banking sector in providing affordable and suitable finance to the SME sector making specific reference to the driving causes of the contraction in the bank credit lending levels.”.

I will withdraw the amendment with the intention of resubmitting it on Report Stage.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 13:

In page 8, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:

“Report on potential benefits of increasing appeals ceiling

3. The Minister shall, within 3 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the potential benefits of increasing the appeals ceiling currently applied by the Credit Review Office.”.

I will withdraw the amendment with the intention of resubmitting it on Report Stage.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 14:

In page 9, to delete lines 24 and 25 and substitute the following:

“(a) Guidelines Issued Under Section 210(1) of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 Regarding Lending Practices and Procedures and Relating to the Review of Decisions of Participating Institutions to Refuse Credit Facilities (S.I. No. 127 of 2010);”.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 15 to 23, inclusive, and 26 to 30, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 15:

In page 9, lines 32 and 33, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

I propose to discuss amendments Nos. 15 to 23, inclusive, and 26 to 30, inclusive, and will group them together. Amendments Nos. 15, 23, and 26 to 30, inclusive, amend the title of Minister for public expenditure in sections 7, 9, 11 and 15 to 18, inclusive, to reflect that the title is now the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 16:

In page 10, lines 12 and 13, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 17:

In page 11, lines 25 and 26, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 18:

In page 14, lines 8 and 9, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 19:

In page 14, line 14, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 20:

In page 14, lines 20 and 21, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 21:

In page 14, lines 24 and 25, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 22:

In page 15, lines 12 and 13, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 23:

In page 15, lines 24 and 25, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 24 and 25 are related and may be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 24:

In page 15, lines 32 and 33, to delete “such person, and determined in such manner, as may be specified in the scheme” and substitute the following: “the Minister who shall refer it to the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, whose decision shall be final”.

Amendment No. 24 replaces section 16(6), which provides for the resolution of any dispute that may arise in relation to any superannuation benefit payable pursuant to a pension scheme made under section 16. The existing provision contemplates a two-step process with two decision makers involved. Given the very small size of the body concerned, it may not be possible to find a suitable decision maker within the body who would not have a conflict of interest. For that reason, I propose to replace this with dispute resolution process whereby a dispute should be submitted to the Minister for Finance, who shall refer it to the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, whose decision shall be final. The replacement provision uses a formulation that is commonly used elsewhere in the Statute Book.

Amendment No. 25 deletes section 16(7), which serves no practical purpose in light of the previous amendment.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 25:

In page 15, to delete lines 34 to 36.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 26:

In page 15, lines 42 and 43, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 27:

In page 16, lines 15 and 16, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 28:

In page 16, line 19, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 29:

In page 16, line 24, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 30:

In page 16, lines 27 and 28, to delete “Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform” and substitute “Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation”.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 31 to 40, inclusive, and amendment No. 43 are related and may be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 31:

In page 21, to delete lines 30 to 33 and substitute the following: “(i) the date on which the borrower receives the offer to enter into the credit facility agreement or alternative arrangement, as the case may be,

(ii) subject to subparagraph (iii), expiry of the period of 15 working days referred to in paragraph (b) of the definition of “constructive refusal” in section 2, or

(iii) where a notice referred to in paragraph (b)(ii) of the definition of “constructive refusal” in section 2 has been given to the applicant, expiry of the period referred to in the notice,”.

Amendment No. 31 amends section 26 of the Bill to provide for a review of a credit decision in the form of a constructive refusal where a lender fails to respond to an application for credit within 15 working days. Currently section 26(2) provides time limits for the making of an application for review by a borrower. However, it does not currently provide for a situation where a relevant person fails to make a credit decision and notify the borrower within 15 days of receipt of the application, which would constitute a constructive refusal. I therefore propose an amendment to add a provision to section 26(2) that will cover such situations.

Amendments Nos. 32, 33, 39 and 40 are technical drafting amendments to amend references in sections 26 and 27 to ensure that defined term "application for review" is used where appropriate. The application for review currently referred to in section 27(1)(d) is not strictly speaking an application for review since it is not a valid application. The reference is amended accordingly. Amendment No. 34 amends section 26 to clarify that the decision referred to in subsection 8 is a previous decision of the service. Amendments Nos. 35, 36 and 37 together impose an obligation on a lender to respond to a decision of the service even when that decision is to uphold the lender's original credit decision. Amendment No. 35 replaces the reference to "a recommendation of the service" with a reference to "a decision of the service". This includes a decision to uphold the lender's original credit decision as well as a recommendation to provide the credit or some of the other recommendation in relation to the credit decision. Amendment No. 36 provides that the lender shall acknowledge the service's decision. Amendment No. 37 amends the reference to "the decision" to "that decision" to distinguish between the decision of the service and the decision of the lender as to what action, if any, to take in response to a recommendation of the service. Amendment No. 38 amends section 27(1)(c) to clarify that "the relevant person" referred to in subsection 1(c) is the relevant person to which the borrower had applied for the loan. Amendment No. 43 amends section 27(2)(c)(ii) by inserting the words "by regulations" after "prescribed". This is to provide clarity as to the regulations referred to in the existing provision.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 32:

In page 22, line 2, after “application” to insert “for review”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 33:

In page 22, line 4, after “application” to insert “for review”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 34:

In page 22, line 18, after “was” to insert “previously”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 35:

In page 23, line 13, to delete “recommendation” and substitute “decision”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 36:

In page 23, line 15, after “specify,” to insert the following: “acknowledging the decision and, in the case of a recommendation under paragraph (b) or (c) of subsection (12), informing the Service”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 37:

In page 23, line 16, to delete “the” where it secondly occurs and substitute “that”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 38:

In page 23, line 25, after “person” to insert “concerned”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 39:

In page 23, line 26, to delete “for review”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 40:

In page 23, line 29, after “application” to insert “for review”.

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Amendments Nos. 41, 42, 44 and 46 are related and may be discussed together.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 41:

In page 23, line 38, to delete “before”.

These amendments ensure that a borrower who receives a credit decision in the 30 days before the establishment day will be able to make an application for review to the new service if it is not too late to apply to the existing review office. Amendment No. 41 is a technical drafting amendment to facilitate the other amendments. Amendment No. 42 removes the reference to a credit decision made by a credit institution and inserts an extended timeframe whereby decisions are excluded not if they were made before the establishment day, but only if they were made more than 30 days before the establishment day. Amendment No. 44 is a technical drafting amendment to facilitate the other amendments. Amendment No. 46 inserts a new transitional provision into section 32 to provide that a decision made not more than 30 days before the establishment day, that if it were made on that day or after the establishment day would be a credit decision, shall be deemed to be a credit decision for the purposes of the Act. This will ensure that regardless of when a borrower receives a credit decision there will be 30 days available to apply for a review of that decision whether through the existing review office or the new service.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 42:

In page 24, line 1, to delete “in the case of a credit decision made by a credit institution,” and substitute “more than 30 days before”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 43:

In page 24, line 4, after “prescribed” to insert “by regulations”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 44:

In page 24, line 4, after “section 2(2),” to insert “before”.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 45:

In page 26, line 34, to delete "this Act" and substitute "Part 3 and that Part shall apply accordingly in respect of that application".

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 46:

In page 26, after line 34, to insert the following: "(3) A decision made not more than 30 days before the establishment day that, if it were made on or after the establishment day, would be a credit decision, shall be deemed to be a credit decision for the purposes of this Act.".

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 47:

In page 28, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following: "Amendment of Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017

38. The Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman Act 2017 is amended—

(a) in section 2, by the deletion of the definition of "Credit Reviewer",

(b) in section 44(2)(c)(i), by the substitution of "An tSeirbhís um Athbhreithniú Creidmheasa" for "the Credit Reviewer", and

(c) in section 50(3)(c), by the substitution of "An tSeirbhís um Athbhreithniú Creidmheasa" for "the Credit Reviewer".".

Mairéad Farrell (Galway West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That concludes the committee's business. I thank members for participating in the numerous meetings we had today. I also thank the Minister of State and his officials, as well as our secretariat.