Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Healy, by agreement.

Until senior decision makers are held personally liable for the decisions they make in the banks, we will not see a change in the culture. There is a really serious problem that keeps on coming up over and over again. This was either a dialogue that was had between the banks, or within the banks, that was essentially a conspiracy to defraud, or else there were 20,000 mistakes. If there were 20,000 mistakes, one would have to question whether these people should be running the banks.

There is another aspect to this that I would want the Government to look at, namely, the whole area of financial management.

AIB launched its IPO knowing about the tracker issue. It would have needed to have set aside the money that it would owe in compensation. It ought to have quantified exactly how much that would be. Bank of Ireland is selling shares knowing that the issue of compensation is coming down the line, but it has not set aside any amount. Is there a contingent liability there? One must also question where the accountancy profession was in terms of capturing some of these issues. The same profile of things is happening time and again.

Are the banks delaying the sale of houses that were repossessed because of the tracker issue? I would like the Minister to ask them about this. Each bank has to know what its liability is because it would have needed to go through cases file by file to identify those in question. There is no reason that the banks cannot press a button today to repay what was taken out of people's accounts and follow that up with compensation. They have the bank details, so it could be done immediately. They should not leave the most difficult cases for last, but that appears to be what is happening. The more vulnerable people are, the more difficult it is for them to use the law. The law exists, but if people have no money and are under the cosh, they will not be able to find someone to take on a legal case. We must recognise that a collective approach is required.

I wish to ask about local authorities. If compensation is paid, it may put people beyond the threshold for HAP, rent assistance or inclusion on local authority housing lists. This serious concern must be considered. If someone loses a house and gets €40,000 in compensation, that amount will initially have to be used to pay rent. It is not enough to buy another house and the person's credit profile will be bad. It is important that this issue be considered comprehensively.

The banks did this with tracker mortgages because variable interest rates made them money. This happened under the watch of the Department of Finance and the previous Minister for Finance. It was done to ensure that banks returned to profitability, but there is no one in the Chamber - at least, I hope there is not - who would want the recovery of the banks to happen at the expense of making people who were already vulnerable even more so.

We have the highest variable rates in the eurozone. This issue also needs to be tackled head on. It has become so expensive for people to service their mortgages that their family finances are often not being spent on some things. At times, this even includes food.

The naming and shaming of banks is important. One cannot reward good behaviour or punish bad behaviour without specifying who is involved. That specification needs to happen. We should not hold back on saying which banks are bad and which are putting their hands up and tackling the issue.

See this speech in context