Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a chur in iúl don Aire Stáit, Teachta Dara Murphy. Is é sin b'fhéidir an chéad uair a dúirt mé na focail sin. Cuirim mo bhuíochas in iúl dó agus don Teachta Micheál McGrath as ucht tacaíochta a thabhairt don Bhille seo. Tá a fhios agam go bhfuil an tAire Stáit, Teachta Murphy, ag déanamh ionadaíochta ar son an Aire, Teachta Noonan. Ba mhaith liom feasta mo bhuíochas a chuir in iúl don Aire, Teachta Noonan agus don Aire Stáit, Teachta Eoghan Murphy.

The Minister, Deputy Michael Noonan, the Minister of State, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, in preparation of the heads of their Bill, have very much considered the legislation I drafted in 2014. When I went through the sections, I flagged some of the areas that would need further scrutiny. We were aware that charities and sole traders would need to be encompassed in the legislation. The spirit of it was to have the issue on commercial and ordinary people separate and it has been achieved in terms of what the heads of the Bill suggest. We will examine it more closely.

In all the sections suggested here, while there may be some minor differences from what the Government proposes, probably the area which is most contentious is in relation to the High Court and the Circuit Court. We have been dealing with the Financial Ombudsman about this and I signalled that it would need a proper and thorough debate. I am familiar with the fact that under the previous Government there has been at trend to move from the Circuit Court to the High Court. We have seen it in other matters, such as the fact that the Revenue Commissioners appeal is to the High Court rather than the Circuit Court. It is a trend.

The Minister makes valid points, and I have heard them from the ombudsman regarding the difficulty if financial institutions try to frustrate the process by appealing, or threatening to appeal, to the High Court and having the costs awarded against the consumer. The intention is that the Financial Services Ombudsman would be represented there. However, the Minister did not talk about what happens if a consumer has to take the Financial Services Ombudsman to court. This is where there is a difference in how we would sort it out. It has happened, and consumers have won. It is not a case that it is some type of scenario that may not be envisaged or that is so far out there that it is unlikely to happen. We are all human. We all make mistakes despite our best efforts.

Someone would need to be willing to risk going to the High Court, have the financial means to do so and be well up on his or her own case, given the limited window of 21 days. We need further discussion on how to protect the consumer. The Minister of State referred to a common purpose in trying to strengthen consumer protection, but there is quite a bit of difference.

This legislation was drafted in 2014. We have drafted an amended Bill but, before we could add it, the version before the House was selected in the lottery. We were going to bring a number of amendments to Committee Stage in the new legislation, which is sitting on my desk, to deal with charities, corporate bodies, the nuanced position regarding the undue regard to formal and legal technicalities, and the name and shame provision, which I had signalled. It is broadly accepted that we need a wider, truer classification concerning how cases are dealt with or not.

The Financial Services Ombudsman's office reports that one of the most frustrating types of complaint it receives comes from people who have been locked out of the process. The figure in this regard is approximately 1,000 per year. Far more affected people are out there, but they have Googled the process and know that they cannot do anything after six years. This Bill opens the doors of justice to the thousands of consumers who allege that they have been badly served by financial institutions. There is no doubt that a proportion of them, and quite possibly a large proportion, have been fleeced.

We all agree that we need to get rid of this provision, and it is a pity that this did not happen a couple of years ago. It should have, but that is in the past and we are moving into 2017. Hopefully, this will be sorted by then. We must figure out what to do with the people who were sold the products in question previously. We mentioned endowment mortgages, a considerable number of which were sold in one period. Consider someone who was sold an endowment mortgage in 1989 or 1990 and a next door neighbour who was sold one in the same year, possibly even on the same day. The first person realises in March of next year that he or she has been hard done by, meaning that he or she can access the Financial Services Ombudsman, but is it the case that the neighbour, who realised four years ago, cannot access the Financial Services Ombudsman?

There are issues that we must address. This will take a great deal of time, we will need the Attorney General's advice and we will need to work in an open and frank way. We must ensure that we support as many individuals as possible. We all know about some of the recklessness that occurred in financial institutions. I am not referring to just the banks in this regard because we also saw such behaviour in the insurance industry. Ireland was referred to as "the wild west" but that phrase was coined about insurance, not banking.

I welcome the fact that the Government is not opposing the Bill and I also welcome Deputy Michael McGrath's support for it. I acknowledge that his Bill deals specifically with the six-year rule, but ours goes much further. A number of aspects need to be considered and accepted. In fairness, the Government has done that, which is welcome, and I am glad to have the opportunity to do so eventually. It is crucial that we progress.

This is my Bill and it will move to Committee Stage. However the heads of other legislation were published yesterday. I am glad that my Bill has acted as a prompt to that. I will do whatever I can in the finance committee to ensure that pre-legislative scrutiny takes place as quickly as possible because the legislation in question is wider in scope than mine, although it also deals with the issue that is at the core of this Bill, namely, consumer protection. That provision needs to become Irish law sooner rather than later.

See this speech in context