Dáil debates

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

Credit Unions: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members]

 

6:15 pm

Photo of Noel HarringtonNoel Harrington (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the motion. I compliment the work the credit unions have been doing throughout the country over the last 50 or more years in supporting their communities.

The intent behind the motion is curious. We know what the problems are. Many credit unions, through the Irish League of Credit Unions, have been very clear about how they would see their role going forward. However, I do not see any part of the motion in which Fianna Fáil suggests abolishing the regulatory authority, changing the regulations or banning the restrictions on credit unions that have been badly affected by the crash, which affected every financial institution in this country. It cannot say that legally and it cannot say it politically, not while there is a banking crisis and while there are issues about the impact of light-touch regulation.

It will focus on the policy and attack the Government for the perceived lack of policy surrounding credit unions in the future. It ignores the fact that the Government has a clear policy and strategy on credit unions. It has set up a commission on credit unions and established the restructuring board, ReBo. It has published the Credit Union and Co-operation with Overseas Regulator Act 2012. It has introduced the stabilisation support scheme and a fund of almost €500 million to support the credit union movement which many credit unions have utilised.

I refer to four credit unions that have found themselves in critical trouble, three of which have used the fund successfully and were transferred to other credit unions and one of which was liquidated. That which was liquidated was one of which I was a member. It was based seven doors away from mine and the trail of destruction that could have been left behind after its liquidation does not bear thinking about. There were job losses, a loss of prestige and status and a loss to the credit union movement and the town, but, thankfully, the depositors, due to a fluke involving the €100,000 guarantee, did not lose their money. Things had to be worked out through the assistance of another credit union.

In any other business I am a keen supporter of as little regulation as possible. Most businesses want to be left alone. However, where citizens' money is concerned we have to have appropriate regulation and appeals mechanisms. It is worth noting that credit unions are being released from restrictions very regularly and it is to be hoped that will continue towards the end of this year. The closing date for appeals is 30 September. The regulations are appropriate and necessary for now. It is to be hoped they will change as credit unions appeal them and become capitalised. We heard from ReBo that credit unions are adequately capitalised.

The motion does not address that or look to the future. Rather, it has cynical, opportunistic and hypocritical wording and attacks the Government for something it did not do. It does not consider what the credit union movement wants.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.