Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

According to reports that were published in today's The Irish Timesand elsewhere, seven lenders are in breach of the mortgage arrears code that was drawn up by the banks and the Government. They are breaching the code in four areas: not seeking timely solutions, communications, fair processes, and process improvements and controls. Some of them have committed offences like seeking additional ad hocpayments from borrowers with whom they have agreements in place and making unilateral changes to arrangements without prior agreement. There was also a policy that permitted lenders to remove borrowers from the resolution process if they did not agree to an arrangement over the telephone. Given that the ordinary people of this country have slaved and toiled to bail out the banks over the last seven years, it is quite incredible that the banks are still allowed to operate in this way. Why has the Government given the banks such largesse? I suggest that Government policy is leading directly to many of the problems in the banks.

I would like to draw the attention of the Minister of State, Deputy Harris, to the only penalty that looks likely to be imposed on the banks, which seems to be that they will be written to on 30 November. There will be no 7 a.m. dawn raids like those that followed water charge protests, for example. The banks are doing what the Government has directed, which is to take back possession of properties while prices are going up. This has allowed the banks to operate in whatever way they like. The rules do not really apply. A slogan that is chanted on marches - "the banks got bailed out, we got sold out" - is very apt on this occasion. Anyone who looks at what is happening with the banks in this country will have to agree that it is true. When will the Government introduce some control over the banks, in the interests of working-class and ordinary people? Repossessions have increased by 500%. I ask the Minister of State to imagine a world in which the banks are owned and controlled by the 99% rather than the 1% - "I wonder if you can", to quote from a John Lennon song.

I suggest that rather than people being evicted from the properties they are renting, which is happening every day of the week, there should be an agreement that those people would remain in their homes. It is coming up to the first anniversary of the eviction of Violet and Martin Coyne, two pensioners who were turfed out onto the street by a receiver for Rabobank. I have been asked on numerous occasions when the Government will introduce an order to protect sitting tenants in buy-to-let properties, rather than adding to the homelessness crisis. All of the replies from the banks, including AIB, of which we own practically 99%, suggest that the bank will honour the terms of formal leases. In other words, they will evict tenants when their leases are up in a few months. Even though ordinary people are bailing out the banks, there is nothing to keep tenants in situ. The Minister of State with responsibility for housing, planning and the Construction 2020 strategy, Deputy Coffey, has said that "bringing in the rules too soon could result in property prices stalling [which] would be undesirable" and that "the falling incidence of negative equity is helping to restore banks' balance sheets". Those comments reveal that Government policy is contributing to this crisis.

Threshold and others have asked for a code of conduct for people like that.

The Minister of State might spare a thought for somebody who did get a helping hand recently from the banks, Deirdre Foley, co-founder of the property investment company D2, who has little sympathy for the Clerys workers. She would not be in the position to fire them if she had not got a write-down from the bank in her hour of need. She was struggling to cope with her company debts, estimated at €450 million, but she was given a sufficient write-down to help her trade and operate.

See this speech in context