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

Cuirim fáilte roimh an mBille seo. Tá sé thar am dó. Anuraidh, bhí go leor plé agus scansáil ann nuair a d'fhógair an Rialtas go mbeadh an Bille foilsithe in 2015. Ag an am sin, dúirt mé gur chóir an Bille seo teacht os comhair na Dála go lom láithreach agus go gcomhoibródh Sinn Féin leis an Rialtas chun a chinntiú go mbeadh sé i bhfeidhm lastigh d'am an-ghairid. Ar an ndrochuair, táimid ag tús 2015, i mí Feabhra, an dara mhí de 2015, agus nílimid ach ag plé an Dara Céim den Bhille seo. Tá imní mhór ormsa anois. An rud a bhí fógraithe ag an Rialtas agus a bhí á iarraidh ag an Rialtas ag an am ná cinntiú de go dtiocfadh leabhair iasachta na mbanc faoi chúram an rialtóra nuair a díoltar iad, agus nach mbeadh siad gan cosaint na ndlíthe agus na rialacha a bhí ag baint leo roimhe sin. Tá deighilt mór idir an sprioc sin agus an reachtaíocht atá os ár gcomhair. Tá an Bille seo dírithe ar an seirbhís atá á dhéanamh ar na hiasachtaí seachas an duine atá i lár na hiasachta.

Tá fadhbanna móra ann agus is athrú mór atá ann fiú ó foilsíodh na heads of Bill. Nuair a bhíomar ag plé an rud seo ag coiste an Oireachtais, bhí athrú mór tagtha ar an méid a bhí i scríbhinn ag an am sin agus na smaointí a bhí ag an Rialtas faoi tar éis comhairle agus a leitheid a fháil. Bhí an comhairle seo ag teacht ó heagraíochtaí a bhí baint acu leis na hiasachtaí áirithe seo. Cuireann sé sin imní mór ormsa agus ar Shinn Féin. Is í an imní is mó atá againn ná go bhfuil iasachtaí bainc díolta ar aghaidh go dtí tríú páirtí ach ní dtagann na hiasachtaí sin lastigh de chúram an Bhainc Ceannais anois.

An éireoidh leis an reachtaíocht seo an méid atá i gceist ag an Rialtas agus an méid atá á rá ag an Rialtas a bhaint amach? Caithfimis mionscrúdú a dhéanamh ar an mBille seo ag céim an choiste. Tá cúpla ábhar mór a gcaithfear a scrúdú san reachtaíocht seo. Sin ceann amháin acu atá luaite agam. Tá cúpla rud eile ann fosta, ar nós an code of conduct on mortgage arrears, CCMA, agus an ról a bheidh ag fear an phobail san reachtaíocht seo.

This Bill is welcome and overdue. The Minister will recall that we in Sinn Féin offered during the earlier part of last year to facilitate the speedy passage of this legislation through the Dáil, if possible, and to engage in a constructive way with the Government. There was huge concern at that time, when the Government announced in its legislative programme that the legislation would be published in 2015. The concern focused on the question of why we would allow these loans to be sold to unregulated third parties when the legislation was not planned to be brought forward until 2015. While the heads of Bill were published last year, we are only now, in the second month of this year, starting to deal with it on Second Stage.

From the time the heads of the Bill were published until its introduction, there was quite a shift in Government thinking on the legislation. It was described as legislation to cater for the sale of loan books by regulated financial institutions to unregulated financial institutions, yet what we have in the legislation is something very different. It is the Consumer Protection (Regulation of Credit Servicing Firms) Bill, and while we could argue as to what is in a name, as we discussed in regard to the heads of the Bill, the reality is there has been a substantial change in Government thinking on what and how to regulate, and where the regulation falls.

This has caused major concern for people who are dealing with this at the coal face and for the members of our party. The issue is whether this does what was originally intended and whether the same type of regulation that applies to banks which hold loans today would apply when the banks sell those loans to unregulated third parties. There is also the issue of whether the regulation will follow if they buy loan books from regulated parties in this State. The answer is that it does not. The simple proposal that was put forward by Government, namely, that the regulation would automatically follow to the third party institutions, is not now the case. It is now a more convoluted structure where it will instead apply to the servicing of the loans by third parties. Therefore, it does not apply to the third party but applies to the next party, which will be employed by the third party to service the credit. This creates a legislative concern as to whether there are gaps and mismatches that exist at this time, or that could be identified by those who want to escape the type of regulation that would follow if this legislation did what it is supposed to do. It is a genuine concern, particularly for those who have been thrown to the wolves - those who have had their mortgages sold on to third party institutions.

One of the outcomes of the banking collapse has been the emergence of vulture capitalism at an unprecedented level. Some of that was inevitable but the level at which this Government has tolerated their actions and, in fact, relied on them is, in my view, sickening. We can see that in terms of the bottom feeders in the property sector. It has always been my view, and I have stated it on the record, that the Government and the banks had an agenda to bump up property prices because it would help in regard to the balance sheets of the banks but also in regard to the Government.

Some of the measures the Government introduced, for example capital gains tax and the REITs, have been geared towards that type of proposal. I believe the Government's proposal in regard to introducing a guarantee scheme that would allow for higher loan to value ratios was also an attempt to try to increase property prices. Thankfully that idea has been put aside now that the Central Bank has stepped in and said that what the Government was trying to do was headed in the wrong direction and that it should take the opposite direction.

We have also seen the sale of loan books of State owned banks and the sale of the IBRC loan books comes to mind. The sale of the IBRC loan books to vulture funds was in my view a calculated decision to throw mortgage owners to the wolves. These mortgage owners have had to wait since without any protection. Deputy McGrath spoke about the type of verbal guarantee that was given. That type of voluntary compliance with the different codes is not based on any legal guarantee, any written piece of paper or any exchange of contract and can be broken at a whim without a fallback position for the Government or the mortgage holder to take action. The sale of loan books has been an ongoing issue and we have seen some of the pillar banks follow suit.

I welcome the Bill and hope it does what it is intended to do. However, I have concerns there are gaps in it and that the shift in focus by the Government could expose some deficiencies. I wish to commend the campaigners for this protection, who have been led by those who have seen their mortgages sold to unregulated entities. They have pressed their concerns in the Houses and have protested outside the gates. They have kept this issue alive and I commend and thank them for their work over many months to keep it real for the public and themselves and most importantly for the political system and the Government. That work has resulted in the bringing forward of this legislation.

Some of the concerns have also been identified by FLAC in its presentation to the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform and in its submission in regard to this Bill. The big concern is whether in regulating the servicers of the debt we actually capture what is intended. In other words, do we regulate the loan books? No, we do not. Therefore, do gaps exist as a result of the legislation? We know, for example, that the code of conduct on mortgage arrears is very weak. It was always weak, but it is weaker now as a result of the review carried out by the Central Bank, in cahoots with the Government and the troika. There are questions in regard to the legislation and its effect. Does the code only apply to the areas relating to debt servicing? For example, are there other areas that will now be outside the scope of the code as a result of the legislation only applying to the servicing of credit and not the holders of the loan book?

Another issue of concern is the Financial Services Ombudsman. I have serious concerns about the weak position of that body and while I commend the work the Ombudsman does, the office needs to be strengthened. In the context of this legislation, the question arises as to what recourse has a person with a mortgage that is being sold on to an unregulated third party to the Financial Services Ombudsman. Will they only have recourse to that office on issues in regard to the servicing of credit or will they have recourse to make a complaint if, for example, the loan book is held by an unregulated entity and there is an unprecedented or unacceptable increase in the interest rate? These concerns in regard to the legislation need to be teased out.

We need to ensure we are given enough time to deal with this Bill on Committee Stage and I understand we will get the opportunity to debate it in greater detail in the Select Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform. I am not convinced, after the debate we had on the heads of the Bill, regarding the change of tack the Government has taken to regulate the servicing of credit instead of regulating the loan books themselves. We are now regulating the middle man instead of the holders of the debt. This is something of which I need to be convinced, but I am open to being convinced and we can tease it out on Committee Stage. Despite the fact there is much to be teased out then, I hope the legislation will pass.

The legislation is complex, but short. It has one main purpose and if we work together, it should not be delayed. There is genuine willingness to get the legislation across the line, but there is also a desire to ensure it is robust enough and that it protects those people who have had no legal protection. In the length of time it has taken to bring this forward, we must get it right. Hopefully, the concerns that need to be addressed can be thrashed out on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context