Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

There will be much work for lawyers in this legislation. Under section 7, which addresses mergers and acquisitions, power will lie with the Minister rather than the Competition Authority. Has the Minister heard from the authority, which is normally aggressive in defending its territory?

Section 8 addresses the role of the NTMA, which has done a good job in its management of the national debt. However, the Minister indicated that he only intends levying a charge in respect of the guarantees being offered in the event of the guarantee being drawn down. Irrespective of whether this is his intent; it was the implication in his note. The provision of the guarantee imposes a cost on the taxpayer because it has a contingent liability note to the national debt, raising the cost of Government borrowing. Will the Minister clarify whether the NTMA will levy a charge?

One of our amendments ruled out of order by the Ceann Comhairle would have made a provision for the charge to be known as the "credit institutions guarantee charge". It would have ensured that, from the moment the legislation was in place, the taxpayers would charge for the guarantees so that they could recover the cost of the guarantee. The Minister's response was distinctly at odds with the notion he and the Taoiseach set out, namely, that the Bill would ultimately incur zero cost to the taxpayer. Will a charge be levied by the NTMA from tomorrow or the day after when the Bill has gone into full provision? That is something we need to know.

This session includes the Report and Final Stages of the Bill. We have tabled a whole series of reasonable amendments to the Minister's Bill which have sought to protect fundamentally the interests of the Irish taxpayer. They have sought to provide a basis for reform of the behaviour of those within the banking industry who have proved to be reckless with other people's money. We gave two examples, recklessness in relation to the construction industry and lending for land speculation. There was also recklessness in trading in products, many of which have turned out to be worthless. In terms of Irish banking, much of which is solid and profitable, this is the area where the losses, poor credit risks and poor loan books have built up.

The Bill contains many instances of the phrase, "The Minister may.....". There is very little to the effect that "The Minister shall.....". When we reflect on the redress scheme the Minister's party presented, we recall that we were told the religious orders would pay a significant amount, and that the burden on the taxpayer would be relatively modest. That turned out to constitute, as Deputy Rabbitte and I discovered on inquiry, an enormous burden on the taxpayer and a relatively small burden on the religious orders. I hope we are not heading down the same road, where the banks will get a tremendously attractive proposition from the State, for a relatively light charge, with the taxpayer again left holding the baby, as has happened so often.

Nothing the Minister has said in the course of the debate has offered us any great level of reassurance. We set certain standards and when the leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, spoke yesterday, he said he would expect the Bill to seek consciously to protect the interests of taxpayers. We said we would seek to change the reckless behaviour of banks and put in place a monitoring system within the new financial structures because the days of buccaneering, freewheeling, light financial regulation are over. We are in a new historic phase, yet the Minister still seems unable to believe that the financial regulation model applied with a light hand for the past 20 years is out of date and over.

In the context of the Minister's failure to meet, in any way, the legitimate requirements of the Opposition to protect the taxpayer, we are supporting him in bailing out some banks in order to protect the Irish financial system, on which people's jobs, homes, security and mortgages depend. However, we do not want this to be cost free and without appropriate protection for the interests of the taxpayer. On that score, the Minister has failed the test set by the Labour Party and we shall not be voting for this Bill.

See this speech in context