Dáil debates

Wednesday, 12 May 2021

Private Security Services (Amendment) Bill 2016: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

3:25 pm

Photo of John McGuinnessJohn McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This Bill cannot be taken in isolation. It is a Bill that is being supported by the House but it is a reflection on what is happening within the banking sector and in the housing crisis.

In 2008, when we had the crash and things got very bad after that, the banks quickly showed how greedy they were and how unrelenting they were in relation to repossessions, chasing people and, in many cases, breaking them down. Some died by suicide. We cannot overlook that. I would say to the Minister of State, Deputy James Browne, that following the passing of this Bill, we need to reflect on the receivers. What action the receivers have taken against individuals on behalf of the bank needs to be examined in great detail. Locks have been changed. Rents have been taken and disposed of in a way that was not in line with any agreement. Some properties were taken and the owners were not even aware that receivers had moved in. I do not want to paint all receivers with the one brush but we have a serious problem with that sector in the context of regulation and accountability and there is nobody whose property they have taken who has been able to get that accountability and to ensure that his or her rights were protected and upheld. Because it has taken so long to bring this legislation before the House, it concerns me that we will have to wait a further length of time to regulate receivers and to bring them to account. I urge the Minister of State to look at the history of what has happened in the State since 2008.

If the Minister of State even listens to the language that is being used today, we seem to take evictions now as being the normal. They are not normal. Evictions were created out of poor debt management by those who are in arrears but they were unable, as lay litigants, to take on the might of the banks which steamrolled through the courts system and almost were supported by the courts system in terms of appointment of receivers and ignoring the rights of the individual. We cannot allow that to continue to happen. We have to restore the rights to those individuals and we have to ensure that there is a mechanism to keep them in their own homes.

Banks have not changed from 2008. In fact, now that they are getting up on their feet and trading again, they are treating customers and those in arrears extremely badly and they are then looking to the courts. The Bill that was passed here in this House regarding hearsay evidence is a further example of how we have armed the banks with the necessary tools to treat people badly. If we are to level the playing field, we have to ensure that each bank would keep its loans, would work with the person or family that is in arrears and would ensure that it is only at the end that they would find a solution of mortgage-to-rent or, indeed, involve the voluntary sector and those not-for-profit organisations that are providing a way out for those who are in such difficulties.

We also have to look to the courts. For the courts to appoint receivers and to behave the way they have, is absolutely appalling.

We have seen examples of the use of security firms that should never have been allowed in this country and not just the ones that have already been mentioned. They blackguarded people - individuals, families and business people - who had decent incomes and businesses and who were trying to do their best in hard times only to be chased by banks and receivers and then to be confronted at their own front door by individuals in uniforms and balaclavas. Where in the name of God would you see it? How did we let it happen? That is what the State has to ask itself. Why has the State not put forward the strongest possible legislation to protect its own citizens? We have seen too many examples of the State itself beating up its own citizens and depriving them of their rights which gives licence to some, but not all, private security companies to act improperly. The minute someone wants to achieve the repossession of a property or to damage a business, then people come in who hide their faces and do the dirty work on behalf of receivers and banks.

This all goes back to the housing crisis, our attitude towards family and community and proper acknowledgement of the rights of people in the context of difficulties they might be experiencing. In 2008, the banks in this country brought us all down and we may have taken our eye off the ball in terms of the devastation that caused. Let there be no doubt about it, the private security companies that engaged in evictions should have no licence whatsoever. Their licence should be taken from them and we should have a strong regulatory system in place, with teeth, to deal with this. We have too many regulators with no teeth, strength or muscle. The side of the citizen must be strengthened as much as possible to ensure the type of bad practice we are discussing does not happen again. I also encourage the Minister, following this debate, to look at receivers and how they behave.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.