Dáil debates

Thursday, 13 December 2012

Credit Union Bill 2012: From the Seanad

 

3:30 pm

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

I do not support term limits. The credit union movement is a democratic movement. In the same way that this institution, a democratic one, does not have term limits, credit unions should not have any either. The issues is dealt with and we lost the debate but I welcome the fact that the Minister of State has extended the term limits. I welcome the exclusion, waiver or whatever the Minister of State wants to call it that I suggested on Committee Stage and furnished on Report Stage. It is basically encompassed in amendment No. 124, which deals with the term limits. The provision is not as strong as I would have liked. It refers to an additional director. I am not sure about this because I obviously have not been on the board of directors of a credit union.

Consider the circumstances if we add up the exclusions that exist in terms of voluntary assistance, employees of other credit unions and account for the real and necessary requirements we place on directors of credit unions to be fit for purpose and have knowledge and experience. In a small credit union, one could limit the pool; therefore, this is a question of additional directors and not about circumstnaces where a credit union cannot fill its complement. Scope is provided to allow that to happen. I hope the procedure will not be cumbersome. Under section 90, the review must be carried out by the Central Bank. One must go to the credit union nomination committee to suggest a director one feels would be fit for purpose. The bank must agree that and then the director is appointed for the period up to the next AGM. After an AGM, the procedure could take nine months, after which the director may only be in office for three months before leaving. The provision is really to ensure that the board does not lose experience and will have the necessary experience to carry out its functions properly. I am a little bit concerned but perhaps my concern is ill founded. The Central Bank will obviously have to work out the procedure. I want to ensure the process is not cumbersome.

The legislation does address my concerns in regard to the points on directors. We could have given full discretion to the Central Bank in respect of a voluntary member of staff or a member of staff from another credit union. I can understand the conflict that the Minister of State talked about in regard to a staff member of one credit union being a director of another, and the need for one to be fully aware of the books and all the various project. If the section encompassed this, it would be up to the Central Bank to determine whether the employee of a given credit union would have a conflict of interest if he or she were a director of another. The amendment would be very safe. We cannot do anything about this at this stage but we could and should have examined it. Perhaps we will do so.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.