Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have listened to my colleagues. There is huge support for credit unions but what matters is that we translate that soft support into legislation and a framework that gives essential support for credit unions. We have heard many fine words here today and that is fine, but credit unions have been existing on fine words for far too long. That is why I proposed this Bill. It is not a final word on what is needed; rather, it is an opportunity for this House to put in place proportionate legislation to support the credit union movement. Like my colleague, Deputy Connolly, I must declare an interest. I too relied on the credit unions for a loan to support a number of my elections. That is an important point to make. Lots of people think that only certain people rely on credit unions but across society, we do.

I also want to recognise the contribution of my colleague Deputy Fitzmaurice who outlined the disappearance or downgrading of the banks in so many local towns. In more recent times, towns in my own constituency such as Ballymote and Tubbercurry in County Sligo and Manorhamilton and Drumshanbo in County Leitrim have been affected by this problem. That strengthens the need for appropriate and proportionate legislation for credit unions in order that they can continue to serve their communities, which is important. My colleague Deputy McNamara spoke of the high level of bureaucracy on little people as distinct from large institutions. If there is one thing I have learned from my reasonably long time in politics, it is that the individual always pays the price while institutions, especially large profit-driven financial institutions, are supported and protected by our legislation.

My colleague Deputy Pringle spoke of the need to take away the absolute power of the Central Bank. Many colleagues articulated their support for the specifics of my proposal or for its intent. That satisfies me because I do not have all the answers to hand. I am sure of one thing, however. The current high level of bureaucracy, without a proper and proportionate response to the financial needs of communities, is no longer acceptable.

Many other colleagues made really important contributions. I do not have time to go through them all. My constituency colleague Deputy Martin Kenny spoke of the overreach of the Central Bank regarding credit unions. Deputy Sherlock spoke of the need for the Central Bank to take its foot off the necks of credit unions and let them thrive. Deputy Boyd Barrett reminded us of the absence of social objectives in our reaction to the banking crisis and reminded us that the objective of the credit unions is to serve the community. They are the model of how financial institutions should operate. Colleagues from the Social Democrats wanted checks and balances, rather than interference in legislation concerning regulations. Deputy Canney spoke of the huge concern about the withdrawal of banking services in local communities. That was echoed by Deputy Tóibín, who noted that everyone speaks of credit unions in terms of motherhood and apple pie but no proper legislative support for the movement is put in place. I also thank the Rural Independent Group. Its Deputies spoke the truth when they said that credit unions were the only ones to extend loans to the community when we needed their support during the global financial crisis.

I listened closely to what the two Ministers of State said. I listened with real expectation and hope. I was prepared to wait the nine months to let this Bill move to Second Stage and that will happen because the Government has a majority. I have no problem with that. That is the system in which we work. I would have been happy to support the Government amendment had there not been so many caveats and get-out clauses to ensure the status quo remains. If I had heard a neutral ministerial response, I would not object to the Government amendment but the Minister of State said that my Bill does not supply all the solutions to key challenges. That is absolutely true but I have not heard his solutions. I am shocked by his statement that I support political interference. I do not. I never have. I am sickened by that suggestion. It is not worthy of the Minister of State and it is not worthy of the Government. My record of supporting credit unions in the European Parliament and in this Chamber will bear that out. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context