Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

I will confine myself to amendment No. 9 because amendment No. 10, which is in the name of Deputy Morgan of Sinn Féin, is being taken with amendments Nos. 79 and 80, which are in the name of my colleague, Deputy Burton, and deal with related matters of liquidity to SMEs.

I want to raise a point with regard to amendment No. 9, which suggests the addition of four additional paragraphs, with three of which I have no difficulty. With regard to paragraph (viii), the Minister suggested in what I hope was not just a fit of enthusiasm that he had moved from relying on moral suasion to legal prescription. He suggested that either of three options are available, namely, a change in culture which would happen in the banking sector, in which none of us believes; moral suasion, which is very slight in terms of any result; or legal prescription. We need to see that and I hope we will see it before we finish the Bill.

With regard to paragraph (ix) and having an orderly property management strategy over a ten-year period, this is valuable in terms of the period of time. However, I have a problem with the new paragraph (x), which seeks "to recover the maximum funds for taxpayers by ensuring that the principal and exclusive purpose of NAMA is to recover the maximum funds possible for the assets acquired by NAMA under this Act". I am unhappy to some extent with the use of the term "principal and exclusive" in that paragraph as it takes from what we have agreed in regard to economic and social development. For example, if that paragraph read "to recover the maximum value", it would accommodate not just a cash yield but it would be able to carry the burden of the social and economic development to which the Minister has assented.

Overall, while I have a problem with Deputy Bruton's paragraph (x), I would agree with the general thrust of what is sought to be achieved from the amendment, with that reservation.

See this speech in context