Dáil debates

Wednesday, 1 May 2013

Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

6:15 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

It was all over the country but the Deputy is right, it was in Dublin.

The Bill will reinstate a provision for repossession which was always there but, as people have said, was put in doubt by the 2009 legislation and its subsequent interpretation by the courts. When it was passed it was on the understanding that the repossession provision would apply. It is absolutely wrong for people to say it would make it easier to repossess. This is not the case. It reinstates the situation as it was and introduces an amendment which makes it more difficult to repossess. This is the factual situation. If people were truthful about it we could have a much better debate.

This is a country where we have mortgages and people own their own properties. Mortgages are given on the basis of undertakings by the mortgagee to the mortgagor. This is how it works and what underpins the transaction. If we do not have this the entire thing would collapse. We expect people to comply with their undertakings. This is the basis of how our society is organised. What about a millionaire? The point has been made by speakers that some millionaires seem to get away scot free, and this should not happen, but it does not mean we should undermine our entire law with regard to mortgages, which has been in place for hundreds of years. Mortgages are issued on the basis that this is the way it works.

I agree more needs to be done to help people in mortgage distress. Section 2 of the Bill includes such steps as do the personal insolvency provisions. Many people speak about the need to be able to write off debt. The personal insolvency regime allows for this and it is in place. We have also taken many other steps. More needs to be done in this regard.

A few people have mentioned the FLAC submission which we all received by e-mail today. It proposes amendments to the legislation on the basis it accepts the need for the legislation. It does not state it should not happen or that one should not be able to repossess. People came here and spoke about FLAC but do not want the legislation, which is contradictory. FLAC made several points, and I hope the Minister and the Government will examine some of the issues it has raised. I will not go into the detail because I do not have time. FLAC spoke about the two-month period mentioned in section 2(2) and speakers here also raised this issue. I do not know whether FLAC or the speakers noticed that section 2(4) allows for further adjournment of the proceedings concerned where it is considered significant progress has been made on proposals for personal insolvency. Perhaps this needs to be examined further. FLAC has made a number of other points and I hope the Minister will examine them to see whether they are necessary.

Other steps must be taken. It is a statistical fact that we have a low level of repossession in this country and we should keep it this way. I support those speakers in the Opposition who stated this and we should do more to help. There needs to be more State intervention to help people stay in and keep their homes. In 2010 a report was done into market indebtedness which recommended with regard to mortgage interest supplement that the requirement one must be working part-time should be abolished and people working full-time should be able to qualify once they meet the means test requirement. This report, and the Department of Social Protection's review on the mortgage interest supplement, recommend the means test criteria be revised. Neither of these measures were taken. There has been a drop in the number of people qualifying for mortgage interest supplement while at the same time the number of people in arrears has trebled and this needs to be examined.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.