Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)

This is a very reasonable motion put forward by the Labour Party. The Government is missing an opportunity, first, to accept a reasonable proposal that is put from the Opposition benches, and, second, to deal with a problem that will have to be dealt with eventually.

There is a fundamental contradiction in the Government's response to the motion. On the one hand, it says there were only 20 repossessions this year, or 90 including sub-prime lending, and that, therefore, there is not really a problem of repossession. On the other hand, it says that if the Labour Party motion is passed, it will have a disastrous consequence for the country's financial position. Speaking during the debate yesterday, the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, stated, "The proposal for a lengthy moratorium is highly dangerous in terms of financial market perceptions and the effect they might have on the funding of the banks on which the whole economy ultimately depends." If the problem is so small, how could it have such an enormous effect?

The answer to that is also contained in the Minister of State's contribution, where he acknowledges, "The number of homeowners in arrears for 90 days or more with institutions covered by the State guarantee is currently of the order 15,000-16,000." That is just with the institutions covered by the State guarantee, without talking about people who are in the sub-prime situation. Second, he also acknowledges there are currently some 14,000 people in receipt of mortgage interest supplement, an increase of more than 200% on those receiving the payment at the end of 2007. Clearly, even on the Government's own admission, there is a problem which is real and will have to be addressed.

The Government will come to the House and tell us that dealing with the banking situation and the State of the public finances is urgent and cannot be postponed. However, the only comfort it will offer to the unfortunate householders faced with mortgage arrears as a result of having lost their jobs, or their businesses being in trouble, or because of the recession which was caused by Fianna Fáil, is to say that, on the one hand, those people can deal with the banks under the code of practice and, on the other hand, that there is the revised programme for Government. Frankly, one of those is worth as little as the other.

We suggest that the problem of repossession and the problem of risk to people's homes is something that should be dealt with sooner rather than later. Early intervention is better because it will cost less. Inevitably, if somebody's home is repossessed, the State will have to bear the financial consequence at the end of the line, either through the provision of social housing or through the provision of rent allowance, the RAS or some other intervention. It will cost and, in the meantime, it will cost not just financially but in human and emotional terms because of the grief that people have to go through due to going through the repossession process. It is better in everybody's interest to deal with this early, which is what the Labour Party motion calls for - early intervention.

The second reason our motion should be accepted is that it removes the element of fear. The big problem for people, even if they have not got the letter or heard the knock on the door to tell them they will be brought to court, is that they fear the possibility that they may lose their homes. That is one of the factors that is contributing to the decline in consumer confidence, which in turn is reflected in revenues, in unemployment and in the difficulty we are having in recovering like other European countries.

The third reason the Government should accept this motion is that it will give it something real with which to secure agreement on the other measures that are required to turn around the country's finances and economy. I suggested to the Taoiseach yesterday that the Government should seek to negotiate an agreement for national recovery which would contain a number of elements, one of which would be a guarantee to people that whatever happens during this recession, provided their situation has arisen from the economic circumstances, they will not lose their homes. If that were put on the table, I believe it would be possible to secure agreement on a whole range of other things with those currently engaged in talks with the Government.

The Government is missing an opportunity to ease the fear among people who are afraid of losing their homes and to ease the real pain they are suffering at the moment. It is also missing an opportunity to carry out an early intervention which will cost less in the long run, and it is giving up something with which it can secure agreement on the other measures that will be required to turn around the public finances. Unfortunately, by voting down this motion tonight, the Government is spurning that opportunity. It is regrettable that it is doing so, and it is very short sighted in taking that approach.

See this speech in context