Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I will deal with amendments Nos. 163 to 168, inclusive, together. The amendments seek to reduce the voting proportions in respect of all creditors. A sub-class of secured and unsecured credit is required to prove a personal insolvency arrangement at a creditors' meeting.

Amendments Nos. 163 and 164 concern proposals to reduce the overall level of votes required at a creditors' meeting to prove a personal insolvency arrangement from the 65% provided for in the Bill to either 30% or 50%. This is a crucial provision with regard to the necessary voting proportions required to approve an arrangement. I consider it unlikely that, in effect, creditors would accept a non-majority vote and agree to be bound by it.

Amendments Nos. 165 and 166 propose to alter the proportions of secured credit that is required to prove a personal insolvency arrangement below 50%.

Amendments Nos. 167 and 168 similarly propose the same proportions of unsecured credit as required to prove a personal insolvency arrangement. I am not convinced that the reductions, as proposed in these various amendments, represent the best approach. They could in fact inhibit reaching an agreement that would be sustainable over a six-year period for a personal insolvency arrangement.

I have considered the various proportions but at this point I have no better alternative proposals. I do not wish to be unfair to Deputies but I have not heard any convincing arguments from them as to why accepting their proposals would enhance the likely acceptance and success of personal insolvency arrangements. I must therefore oppose the amendments.

See this speech in context