Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The Deputy should note that the Minister for Justice and Equality was keen to take this issue himself but he is in the Middle East in his capacity as Minister for Defence. The Deputy will accept that as legitimate. I will go through the reply as quickly as I can but before I do I wish to point out that people who find themselves in desperate situations are inclined to resort to sometimes desperate solutions. We should not forget that.

I thank Deputy Collins for raising the issue. The Government has brought forward significant modernisation of the law to address the problem of over-indebtedness, primarily through the enactment of the Personal Insolvency Act 2012 and reform of the Bankruptcy Act 1988. The Personal Insolvency Act established three new debt resolution mechanisms: the debt relief notice, the debt settlement arrangement and the personal insolvency arrangement.

In the context of today's debate, the personal insolvency arrangement, PIA, has been the most significant development. The PIA will enable the agreed settlement of all unsecured debt and secured debt up to €3 million, a cap which may be increased with the consent of all secured creditors. The PIA provides for the negotiated resolution of secured debt in a court-sanctioned process that provides for certainty for creditors and hope and relief for debtors. The PIA does not only cover mortgage debt; it is effectively a form of personal examinership that can comprehend debt arising from trading or business activities, including agricultural activities.

To protect the constitutional rights of all concerned and to prevent potential actions for judicial review, the Act provides for enhanced oversight by the court of the new debt resolution procedures. This court involvement has the significant benefit to the debtor of providing protection from enforcement actions by creditors, either through the negotiation period or during the lifetime of the arrangement. Trust law allows for the legal title of land to be held by trustees not for their benefit but rather for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the trust, a point that relates specifically to Deputy Collins's question. The beneficiaries are said to be the beneficial owners and the property must be used for their benefit rather than for the benefit of the trustees. The trust mechanism may be used in family situations where, for example, the intended beneficiary is a minor or is otherwise incapable of managing the property. Trusts are also commonly created in the context of wills where the testator may leave property to his or her spouse for life and afterwards to his or her children. The creation of trusts for charitable purposes is also common.

The Property Registration Authority is the State authority which manages and controls the Land Registry and Registry of Deeds. I am advised by the authority that in recent months over 500 applications for the registration of notices of certificates of acknowledgement of the living man's claim of right were received in the Land Registry. Based on the third party witness common to all these documents, it appears they originated in the trust in question. The notices of certificates of acknowledgement appear to be applications to record on a State register the acknowledgement of the living man. Freemen on the Land is one of several groups, originating in Canada and the USA which advances the notion that the legal person and living person are two distinct entities. Under the belief system, the living person is not bound by law or court rulings unless and until the living person or freeman contracts to accept such law. Obtaining an entry on a State register of the recognition of the living man or freeman on the land is often a first tactical step within these groups. These applications were all rejected by the Property Registration Authority.

See this speech in context