Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)

I welcome the Bill. During a Topical Issue Debate two weeks ago, I highlighted the degree of regulation of mortgage brokers and financial intermediaries. Last week, the Central Bank published the detail of the new regulations it is seeking to implement to protect consumers better and to ensure that people availing of the services of mortgage brokers and others are able to honour their financial commitments and are treated in an honest and professional manner. I welcome the progress represented by last week's announcement.

If we are to ensure proper regulation of the sector, an important point that I raised in the House two weeks ago must be remembered. If a judgment is pending against someone in respect of his or her work in another industry, it should make practising as a mortgage broker or financial intermediary more difficult for that person. We should do all we can to reduce the level of self-certification. Clients are asked to produce evidence of their income and debt levels. That is then taken as solid evidence in deciding whether they are able to afford to repay a loan.

I have seen with my own eyes the consequences of people having been loaned money they cannot afford to repay and the difficulty in evaluating accountability where there is a third person in the link between the lender and the lendee. The Central Bank is making progress in regulating that area. I know it is investigating it but I use this occasion to add to the importance of the point of dealing with the issue of self-certification and to do more to ensure that the people practising in the industry do not have judgments or findings against them that would indicate they are not fit to perform the role they have.

Section 33 provides protection for whistleblowers in this area. It builds on a provision in the Central Bank Reform Act 2010, which was passed in a previous Dáil term when I was a Member of the Seanad. That Act introduced the concept of a controlled function in terms of a number of roles in a bank that were very sensitive to the financial viability of the bank, and maybe even to the State, and that a heightened level of supervision and responsibility was endowed on those roles. This legislation now extends a greater degree of protection to a person who might be in such a role who believes something wrong is happening and wants to make that known to the appropriate authority.

It is important, when implementing this Bill, to make clear to those working in the financial services industry and the banks the heightened degree of responsibility that is now on their shoulders due to the passage of the 2010 Act and this Bill and the greater consequences they will face if, for whatever reason, they do not comply with the greater degree of responsibility conferred on them by the Central Bank Reform Act 2010 and by the protection available through the passage of a Bill such as this one.

I wish to follow up on a point Deputy O'Donnell raised when he said that people who worked in bank branches knew that large quantities of money were being lent to people who might not be in position to repay it. I would like clarification of whether unwise commercial activity, as opposed to illegal commercial activity, falls within the ambit of the whistleblower protection provision in this Bill and if such protection would be extended to a person who was unhappy about the sustainability of lending by a bank to a company or a group of individuals. I would like that point clarified. It relates to my earlier point that we need to make it clear to people working in these industries who have controlled functions that there is heightened responsibility on them and protection available to them due to the passing of this Bill.

See this speech in context