Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I fully support the Bill and what it intends to do. I pay tribute to Deputy Doherty for bringing it forward because it is necessary and important to do so. The Bill intends to ensure that the Central Bank is informed by insurance companies on the effect of the personal injury requirements on insurance. We all know that insurance is a statutory requirement that everybody needs to have but, in reality, insurance companies use it as an excuse. As soon as a claim becomes possible, they try to get out of it. That is the reality of the situation.

Unfortunately, because of the system we have in the Dáil, Opposition Members cannot introduce Bills that make real change. I imagine this Bill could be a lot stronger and could be introduced in a way to make real changes to how the insurance system works. I welcome the Government's acceptance of the Bill, but it is kicking it down the road for nine months. What does the Government hope will happen in that nine months? In recent months we have seen the Government accept most Private Members' Bills and motions that have been introduced. Is the Government afraid of seeing the figures go up when the vote takes place? Rather than the Government getting a kicking on social media and in the press for voting down the legislation, it has decided to kick it down the road for nine months on the basis that it will probably die on Committee Stage or it can be finished off in some way that will attract less publicity and look better for the Government. The Government wants to look good by accepting everything: to show it wants to help everybody by taking something on board.

I do not know if this is parliamentary language, but it is basically a load of crap. I would have more respect for the Government if it would stand up and say why it is opposing something or why it thinks something is not working or could not work. Why does the Government not come straight out and say that what it wants to do is ensure that insurance companies in this case have an easy ride, so that they can make money and keep it in the system as quickly as possible, and they do that on the backs of those in society who must have insurance because people cannot go on the road or open a business unless they have insurance? Why does the Government not say its role is to make it as smooth as possible for insurance companies in order to keep them here? That is really what is happening.

The system has been exposed big time through the pandemic. Insurance companies included pandemic insurance as an add-on to make their insurance look far better than what anybody else was offering, but as soon as it happened they tried to find an excuse not to pay compensation. People had to take cases and go to court. The cases are going through the courts now and people have won. Insurance companies will not offer pandemic insurance from this point on because they know there is a chance they could get caught.

They will find something else to offer as a marketing tool. That is sad but it is the reality of the situation and it will not change while this Government is in power.

I spoke earlier about the Government accepting motions. I moved the Thirty-Seventh Amendment of the Constitution (Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) Bill during Private Members' business some months ago calling for a referendum to put those rights in the Constitution, including a constitutionally protected right to housing. Rather than vote it down, and even though we know the Government is not in favour of that, it decided that the Bill would be read two years later. That makes it look like the Government supports it but after two years, when the Bill comes up on Committee Stage, I will be pushing it big-time and we will see then if the Government is actually in favour of it. I do not think it will be and it will look to kill it off completely. A number of weeks ago, I tabled a Private Members' motion on the Common Agricultural Policy, how to make it work for small farmers across rural Ireland, in Donegal, Mayo and along the west coast, and how European money could be used to benefit all of them. The Government accepted the motion which, at the time, was a tribute to it, or so we thought. Now, however, we discover there is a call for an emergency motion in the House because the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine is in Europe, negotiating the Common Agricultural Policy in order to undo what this House agreed to do and said should be done a few weeks ago. That is the nonsensical nature of this whole process and it shows up what the Government is trying to do. It is kicking it further down the road and making sure it does not have to make a decision, but it does not want to appear that it is voting against these motions. It is sad that is the level at which the Government is going to pursue it. I think I am right. The Government might argue I am not but if I am, time will tell.

See this speech in context