Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the 30 Deputies who contributed to this debate on insurance reform. One of Deputies stated that it is a dry topic. Anybody who contributed to the debate understands that insurance is a real issue that affects every household and business in Ireland.

I will summarise one or two points I made at the beginning in case some Deputies were not present. The biggest sector in the insurance market is motor insurance, with 2.2 million policies. Some 1.6 million homes are insured in the house insurance market, which is the second biggest sector. The business sector is the third biggest sector. The one surprising thing in that figure is that it means a number of houses have no insurance whatsoever. That is interesting. We do not have exact details on where those houses are located. When we look at the number of house insurance policies in place, however, it is less than the number of houses. I do not know whether it is the cost, that people do not know they should have insurance or whether they think someone else is insuring their home. The number of houses without insurance is something to bear in mind.

The first thing I wish to do is respond to some of the specific issues in this debate, which has gone on for more than three hours. I was asked by two or three Deputies across the Chamber why the Government is not supporting the Private Members' Judicial Council (Amendment) Bill 2021. I acknowledge and accept the work put into the insurance area over a period by Deputy Doherty and the Sinn Féin Party. A number of its proposals have been incorporated into Government legislation, such as price walking. We decided not to go ahead with that legislation, however, because the timescale proposed in it with regard to reporting information is longer than what we will achieve by means of the Insurance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2022, which was passed by the Seanad yesterday and which ill hopefully be signed by the President next week. We included a shorter timeframe in that Bill in respect of the receipt of information, rather than having people wait a few years.

The main reason we did as I have outlined was to solely focus on the cost of the reductions resulting from PIAB awards. That is not the only reduction that will occur in respect of the cost of insurance because that excludes legal costs, efficiency costs and the savings for policyholders as a result of increased competition. What was proposed in Deputy Doherty's Bill was worthy, but it was too narrow and not reflective of the entire savings that occur in the area. I accept the goodwill and good intention behind the Bill, however. We took a more comprehensive approach through the information the Central Bank is issuing by means of its national claims information database, which is vastly superior to what is available in any other EU country. It is very important to say that.

It was mentioned that PIAB awards are down almost 50% and that people have not seen this coming through in their premiums. That is true, and there is good reason for it. Some of the reductions are being tested in the courts because they are so significant. There have been test cases. We had two good judgments recently, backing them up in their entirety. People have been slow to accept the new reduced awards. There is a backlog of awards. Once the courts firmly stand over the judicial guidelines, as they have been doing to date, all those reduced awards will come through the system. It will result in reduced premiums when the costs actually flow through. A measure of how these new guidelines are much tougher than those which preceded them is reflected in the fact that people are not happy with them. I would have been more concerned if everybody was accepting of the new guidelines because it might say to me that they were not reduced sufficiently. The fact is that they are coming through, but it takes time.

I was specifically asked about the reform of the PIAB legislation. That is at pre-legislative scrutiny stage at the moment. I was separately asked about the duty of care legislation. The Minister for Justice spoke at length earlier and outlined the exact position in that regard. That legislation has been approved by Government. We expect all those items of legislation to go through in this calendar year.

The issue of flood insurance was raised by a number of Deputies from different parts of the country. One point I will make is that where flood relief work is carried out by the OPW, two types of defences are put in place. Fixed permanent defences are put in place as part of a flood scheme and demountable defences are only brought out when there is a severe weather warning and when there will be major flooding involving a particular river. The local authorities or their contractors know they have a couple of hours to get the temporary demountable defences up and in place for one, two or three days or for as long as the flood continues. Some 94% of houses in the areas covered by fixed flood defences have flood insurance. The figure is 74% for those in areas where there are demountable defences because the risk is still a bit high if the demountable defences are not put out quick enough. There is a lesson to be learned there. We should be going for the fixed defence mechanisms, where possible, but there are often local objections in terms of having them in place on a permanent basis. These factors should be looked at before any schemes are put in place in future.

On the issue of mapping, people have different maps. Some insurance companies operate their own maps based on their own customer knowledge. The OPW has its own maps but, because it is a State body, it cannot make those maps commercially available to the insurance companies. Therefore, there are OPW maps, local authority development maps and insurance company maps. I would like to see some rationalisation in that area in order that everybody will know what map they are working from. As a result of the fact that insurance is a competitive industry, each insurance company does not automatically share the information it has gathered through its own resources. As a result, that is something I would support.

The Alliance for Insurance Reform and the survey of its members regarding the pinch points was mentioned by several speakers. I understand and appreciate all of that. I acknowledge the work of the Alliance for Insurance Reform, Mr. Peter Boland and the people who work with him on that. I have met Mr. Boland on a number of occasions. I will be meeting him again very shortly to discuss the measures that have been raised in this debate and his ongoing contact with the office.

With regard to what IDA Ireland is doing with the Office to Promote Competition in the Insurance Market, which I chair, IDA Ireland has informed me that because of the changes that have been made in the insurance market here, it now has a package it can take to international insurance companies to attract them to this country. IDA Ireland me two years ago that it could not have done it because of the level of uncertainty and lack of the legislation regarding duty of care and the cost of claims. However, it is now saying that because of the changes in the past two years, it has its package and is commencing to attract some foreign companies into the country.

One speaker suggested that insurance is just a profit-making business for a handful of wealthy people and that the State should insure everything and pay the cost of every claim in the country. I will let people make their own judgments if they think that. We got the full gamut of approaches to that, however.

The issue of thatched roofs was mentioned. There has been contact with the heritage section of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. I will make a point to make direct contact with that Department through my office in order that we are pooling our resources and efforts in that regard. A number of houses and pubs have thatched roofs. As a result of Brexit, some of the companies have pulled out of that business. We basically have only one company providing that cover; it is difficult now.

The issue of circuses and aerial dancing was raised. I am not familiar with that matter but I will immediately follow it up through my office. The matter was raised of the information issued by the Central Bank earlier today through its national claims information database. That represents full information from the insurance industry, the millions of policies involved and costs of various claims that have been made, whereas I understand the Alliance for Insurance Reform information will be based on a survey of its members. The volume of information the Central Bank covers in its report is vastly more extensive than what would be available on a survey based on Alliance for Insurance Reform members. That is not to take from the good work the Alliance for Insurance Reform does. I am working closely with it in dealing with the various pinch points. Today's report shows that insurance costs for the vast majority of businesses - 60% of them - are less than €1,000. Therefore, the cost for sole traders and a person with one or two employees is under €1,000. Some 92% of all businesses in Ireland have premium costs of less than €50,000.

With regard to specific areas that have been dealt with successfully in recent times and in respect which there were questions today, the early childhood sector in Ireland is now covered by Allianz Ireland working with the brokers of Arachas Insurance. PALI is covered by Berkshire Hathaway, which is a great new support in the industry for play and activity centres. Horse Sport Ireland and horse and equestrian sports are being dealt with by Allianz Ireland. That was not the case last winter when there was no cover for various equine activities. It is now in place for people who wish to do them. Ireland's Association of Adventure Tourism is being dealt with through Fáilte Ireland and the insurance brokers Arachas Insurance. The Spancel Hill horse fair was referred to in the House some time ago by the Deputy from Clare. As it is being conducted in a public area, the local authority has come in to help on that.

I was told coming up to last Christmas that ice rinks could not get insurance. Two rinks were successful in doing so. We are making progress even on the pinch points. However, the position with regard to things such as bouncy castles continues to be a problem.

I will conclude with that. I thank the 30 Deputies who contributed to the debate. We accept that significant progress has been made. Much now depends on the courts implementing the policy decisions relating to insurance made by the Oireachtas, supported by all sides. I look forward to further progress in the period ahead.

See this speech in context