Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their contributions. Going back to first principles, the purpose of the Bill when it becomes law is to ensure that if loan books are sold from a regulated entity to a non-regulated entity that we extend the regulation mandate to the non-regulated purchaser. The Bill fulfils that purpose.

Some issues have arisen in regard to the Bill. One is the belief among many people that the new owner of the loan book can vary the terms of the contract. The new owners cannot do that. When they buy the loan book, they must comply with the terms of the original contract and there is no variation on that. In regard to the question on bonds, when bonds fell, insolvent companies were not able to finish estates and contracts because the bond was not available. Now, the liquidator is working his way through the assets and it appears quite clear that he will be in surplus once he deals with all the creditors. When he has worked through, there will be a residue of creditors such as local authorities. Therefore, it is the local authorities that will be at a loss where the bond lapses. However, it appears now there will be sufficient moneys to repay the local authorities if they are an unsecured creditor, because the funds available now are sufficient to cover unsecured creditors. The same will apply, for example, to credit unions which invested. Some 14 or 15 credit unions invested moneys and they are unsecured creditors. It appears now they will get their money back, but it is up to the liquidator to work his way through the process.

The ideas in the Deputy's amendment do not really run from the Bill. They are certainly a subject for debate, but they do not constitute an amendment for this Bill. Perhaps they should be included in a Private Members' Bill or some such mechanism.

See this speech in context