Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)

I cautiously welcome this Bill, which is long overdue. The basis for the Bill is the recommendation from the Law Reform Commission, published in December 2010, which outlined the reform of the legal system on how our society manages and deals with problems of indebtedness. The recommendation of the LRC makes sense and represents a breath of fresh air in an area of law that has long been forgotten.

The main thrust of the recommendations are contained in the insolvency Bill, but there is a need to tease out many issues in it to figure out the best options available to citizens when the Bill finally becomes law. I welcome the fact that the Bill will permit those who no longer service the debt to seek a remedy outside of the courts through the non-judicial route. These trustees will play a crucial role as a go-between for the mortgage holder who applies for one of the non-judicial options and the various creditors. There should be penalties and sanctions to ensure the personal insolvency practitioners remain 100% impartial in their dealings with clients. How will the Government ensure these practitioners remain independent?

The proposal to reduce the term of automatic discharge from bankruptcy from 12 years to three in the case of a judicial petition for bankruptcy is a progressive step. The new mortgage arrears support unit should be integrated with the money advice and budgeting service, MABS, whose existing structures are invaluable. Such a move would also ensure more one-to-one contact because MABS has the personnel available with the required experience. It seems that with the proposals for the new unit, the emphasis will be on electronic communications with uncertainty regarding staffing levels and the unit's staff being available to meet with mortgage holders in difficulty.

A new consultation paper on reforming the credit reporting system argues the State should take control of it. If and when the new credit register comes into force, how will people be protected from this new State body forcing people to pay non-credit bills such as property taxes and the like? Could the State use the new system to blackmail people to pay their property taxes against a threat of a bad credit reference?

How will people be protected against unscrupulous banks which may unfairly reject their payment plans? The banks and financial institutions will have to show compassion. The veto option for the banks and financial institutions will have to be amended. All the Bill's provisions must leave ample flexibility to ensure citizens are engaged in an affordable and working debt resolution process.

See this speech in context