Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

In this Bill and in the Act of 2003 the Minister for Finance seems to have adopted a babushka doll attitude to credit unions with the Central Bank being the largest doll, underneath which there is the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority, and underneath which again there is third doll which is the office of the credit union regulator. That analogy might make credit unions seem very secure, being protected by two larger and wider bodies. However, it is also very claustrophobic and suffocating for credit unions which, quite deliberately, through representations of the larger financial institutions, have been put in this legislative position to discourage their further growth. It has for long been argued, in both the 2003 Act and in this Bill, that credit unions were being treated unfairly, that they represent a different approach to banking, an approach that, particularly given recent events, should be looked at far more kindly. It is all about economies of scale, local access to services and, in particular, a voluntary ethos that is all too obviously lacking in larger financial institutions. In particular the Minister seems to have a philosophy that professional, meaning people who are paid large amounts of money to adopt attitudes that we see are far from professional, is different from voluntary, which is seen as amateur and shambolic. By refusing to accept these amendments the Minister is making a bad situation worse for a movement that is badly needed as a viable alternative in the financial services sector.

See this speech in context