Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)

The Minister of State's proposal will not change anything. I do not wish to accuse him of misleading the House but he is not being completely clear that there is no change and this is really window dressing.

I met the borrowers recently. They have endured trauma, penal interest rates and have been forced to fight their case in court. This Bill will not vindicate their rights. They want this Bill to be amended to put aside a special fund to meet any requirements which the courts may lay upon the new plc company when it comes into being. These people feel wronged and that they are not being listened to. The Minister of State has not listened to their views.

Fine Gael has three amendments to the Bill. I refer to the practice in the United Kingdom. A court procedure must be used before a company can be demutualised. The court may appoint an examiner to ensure the assets and liabilities of the company are in order. The company may even demutualise after that. Fine Gael proposes including this process in the Bill. Our amendment proposes that an application may be made to the High Court for an order sanctioning the conversion of a society into a company. It will propose that in any application, the Minister for Finance, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and any person, including an employee who alleges that he or she would be adversely affected by the carrying out of this conversion, will have a right of audience. This right will be enshrined in law.

Fine Gael proposes that before the court can make any order, the court must be satisfied that all the assets and liabilities are in order. We propose that the court may appoint an independent actuary or other person who is deemed by the court to be sufficiently qualified for the purpose to investigate the society seeking conversion into a company and to report to the court on any issues arising from such investigation.

This is the current law in the United Kingdom. I ask the Minister of State the reason it is not the law here. The Bill should be amended to vindicate the rights of borrowers to ensure their case can be properly and independently heard and validated by a court.

See this speech in context