Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

We need to be careful that we are not mixing things up. We know there are additional services that credit unions can provide. These have to be approved by the AGM and so forth, and the credit union would then apply to the Central Bank. If it is approved and has the capacity to provide the additional services, it can provide them. We also know the position with regard to shared services at the back end. The concern is in regard to shared services at member level. This is where the Bill is lacking, in that it does not stipulate the process whereby such shared services can happen at member level. There are the CUSOs, whose "activities or services may include but are not limited to ...", as the amendment states.

The wording rules out the concern the Minister of State and Deputy Michael McGrath have raised that this could limit the type of shared services to be provided because it is clearly stated that those are the services that may be provided but it is not limited to them. The purpose of the amendment from the point of view of the Oireachtas is to ensure that this is way we would like to see the credit union movement evolve in the future, but we will not allow it to do so unless it has proven it has the capacity to do it and that it has satisfied the Central Bank. We would be saying that, as a Parliament, we want to see the credit union movement, which has a fantastic history – there have only been a couple of black marks against smaller institutional members – go in this direction. If the credit union movement wants to keep up with where people are at, we need shared services at member level but we are putting in two very clear restrictions. The section might never be enforced or perhaps none of the institutions will be able to meet the criteria set out.

This is about signalling to the credit union movement that such a change is possible. It is not happening currently. I welcome the Minister's commitment to refer the proposal to the commission. If he accepted the amendment he would still have to refer it because there is much work to be done in the background to ensure it could go ahead. As we heard from Deputy Broughan, some of the work is already under way but it must be dealt with by the advisory group. The intention of the amendment is to send a signal. I am happy to withdraw the amendment if the Minister of State would consider a suitable formulation to the same end. The legislation is burdensome – rightly so in certain areas – in terms of regulation, and a signal is being put down for shared services at member level in the future.

See this speech in context