Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome that. As I said, the FSPO will operate within the rules that we set. It would be worth having that conversation with the Attorney General as well. The original Bill stems from the Zalewski case in the WRC. Any quasi-judicial organ of the State should have fair procedures, but fair procedures do not mean that someone should have to sign the complaint. Fair procedures can be about being notified that a complaint is in, and that an individual has the right to be there, to be heard, to be cross-examined and to take evidence under oath. These were all the issues that were at the core of the case that was dealt with by the Supreme Court. It should not be a block for an individual. As I said, the FSPO is a good first step but advice from the Attorney General on how this can be addressed in the here and now, or going forward, is crucially important.

I will not press the amendment, given the Minister of State's commitment, although to tell the truth I want to press it. This is a big issue. It may not be one that affects hundreds of thousands of people but as I have said over and over again, a lot of the issues that become financial scandals happen because of one individual. One person did not lie down, was not going to be browbeaten by the financial institution and may have told his or her story to people. Those people may have thought that person was a crackpot or whatever, but he or she just kept on going and took it to the FSPO, which ruled for him or her. In some cases, the FSPO ruled against the person and he or she still kept on going.

I know people who have benefited from the actions of one individual. I will not mention the bank, but there was an FSPO case a number of years ago. One individual took a case on prevailing rate issues. That person won the case. One complaint won that case and thousands of people were notified that they were owed thousands of euro by that bank. Let us imagine that the person who took that case against a major financial institution in this State was a woman whose partner or former partner was exerting control over her and would not sign the document. Can you imagine the impact of that on any financial institution? It would state straight away that it could not deal with that case and to forget about it, and not one of those thousands of people would have ever found out that they were robbed by that financial institution. At its core, this is about the right to justice, the right to be heard, and rights in those circumstances where blackguarding is going on that tries to deny access to the organs of the State that allow a person to have his or her complaint heard, considered and adjudicated on. It is that person's right in the first instance. I am very conscious, from our past, that the actions of such an individual can have an impact on tens of thousands of other people who have been wronged but who never knew about it and would never do anything about it if were it not for that person.

I will leave it at that but I am very passionate about this issue. I am happy to work with the Minister of State on it. I will return to it because, as I said, this issue can be resolved. I hope it is without delay.

See this speech in context