Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Taoiseach the number of Cabinet committee meetings held so far this year; if there is any committee that has not met yet. [49721/12]

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Taoiseach the supports provided by his Department to the Cabinet sub committee on mortgage arrears. [50878/12]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Taoiseach if the Cabinet committee on Children's Rights Referendum has met recently. [50918/12]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Taoiseach the number of meetings of the Economic Management Council held this year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [56512/12]

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 7 together.

All Cabinet committees, including the Economic Management Council which has the status of a Cabinet committee, have met this year and a total of 91 meetings have been held. My Department provides all necessary secretariat support for the Cabinet committee on mortgage arrears. The Cabinet committee on the children's rights referendum met on two occasions, on 23 and 31 August, and its work is now concluded.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I refer first to the Cabinet committee on the children's rights referendum on which a few questions need to be addressed. It is sad that in the aftermath of the very significant High Court ruling on the information leaflets the Government circulated in the course of the campaign, that we only had an opportunity earlier today to address this matter when Deputy Troy questioned the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, on the matter. As it is something about which the public is concerned, I ask the Taoiseach to give us some information on the workings and meetings of the Cabinet committee on the children's rights referendum.

Did that committee approve the wording of the material that appeared on the website and was circulated in the leaflets that were distributed across the country? With the benefit of hindsight, is the Taoiseach satisfied that the very strong similarity between the party-political leaflets that Fine Gael and the Labour Party produced was reflected in the material that was produced by Government, which in itself is clearly contrary to the terms of the McKenna judgment? Does the Taoiseach accept that because all parties in this House were in support of the amendment the Government was complacent in its approach to the referendum? When I had the opportunity to speak here on the Thirty-First Amendment of the Constitution (Children) Bill, I said it was incumbent on all of us to go out, be enthusiastic and positive, and explain the merits of this proposed amendment to the public. While we welcome that the referendum was won, we were all disappointed that the level of participation was far less than most of us, including, I am sure, the Taoiseach, would have liked.

I ask the Taoiseach to outline the workings of the Cabinet committee on the children's rights referendum. Can the Taoiseach finally give us information on the role of the Attorney General regarding the wording used? In the aftermath of the ruling, leaks from the Government indicated that some people were seeking to lay the blame for the difficulties in which the Government finds itself at the door of the Attorney General. Would the Taoiseach care to exonerate the Attorney General from any involvement in this process? Did she see the wording?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am constrained in what I can say because there is a High Court challenge under the provisions of the Referendum Act 1994 and therefore I do not want to say anything in the House that would in any way prejudice that challenge before the High Court. The referendum took place against the background whereby for 20 years it had never reached the point of the question being asked of the people. It was a significant development by the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs working with the Attorney General and the Government to bring it to a point where the people were asked that question. As the Deputy is aware, we have now had four referenda in 18 months. The Constitutional Convention has been established. I accept completely and I respect the decision of the Supreme Court in this matter and the Government will reflect on the issues raised by the Supreme Court in its judgment. Clearly the Supreme Court is the ultimate legal arbiter in terms of the Constitution and the way our legislation is to be interpreted. As there is a High Court challenge under the 1994 Act, I do not want to say anything in regard to the referendum that might in any way be deemed to be or perceived to be prejudicial to the case before the High Court. I would be happy to talk about it afterwards.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My question is on the Cabinet sub-committee on mortgage arrears. However, before I come to that, if I may, I wish to say that it is clear the budget was not equality-proofed. There is a practice in the North, which is part of the statutory obligation - I believe it is section 75 - making it necessary for departments to equality-proof any decisions they take.

I commend that to the Taoiseach. It would mean that the Government would have looked at cuts in the respite care grant or child benefit and assessed the social and other consequences for citizens.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Cabinet sub-committee on mortgage arrears met eight times in recent months. As the Deputy is aware, the sub-committee was established last March and its remit is to oversee the implementation, on a cross-Departmental basis, of the Government's response to mortgage arrears, agree a detailed implementation plan for the recommendations of the report of the interdepartmental working group on mortgage arrears, ensure appropriate prioritisation of the delivery of this plan is put in place across all relevant Departments, and develop any further issues relating to mortgage arrears that are required arising from publication. The Government focused on four areas, which included resolution strategies by the banks and the new personal insolvency framework.

The Deputy will be aware that the Personal Insolvency Bill was published in June 2011, completed Fifth Stage in the Seanad last week, and is back in the Dáil for Report and Final Stages this week. It will be completed by the end of the year and will create a modern and fairer approach to dealing with unsustainable debt. Work is also under way on the establishment of the Insolvency Service of Ireland to ensure it is ready to provide the new service following the enactment of the legislation. The director of the service is in place along with a number of staff to oversee the establishment of the service early in 2013.

Deputy Adams rightly raised the issue of repossession of homes. He is aware that when banks lend money to borrowers for the purchase of houses, there are conditions attached to those lendings. This means that if the borrower is not in a position to pay, the right of acquisition or repossession of the house applies. In this country, the number of repossessions has been very low and we want to keep it that way. We did not want to present the issue raised by the Dunne judgement, which was a loophole in the legislation identified with regard to certain circumstances for some loans, until the Insolvency Service of Ireland was in place. The issue required clarification under the memorandum of understanding with the troika, and this will be done afterwards. It does not mean there will be a rash of house repossessions, as some people have said. The Ceann Comhairle knows better than most that everybody in this country has pride in their homes and that ownership of a home is of exceptional importance.

The homes of the most distressed mortgage holders can be protected through a mortgage-to-rent scheme, where the ownership of the house passes to the approved housing body, subject to eligibility criteria. There is also the question of comprehensive guidance and advice. I note that AIB said recently that it hoped to be in a position to deal with 2,000 mortgages per month that are either in arrears or distress or where there is a problem. I am sure that the best news many households can get is that a solution has been worked out that does not require the repossession of the home. We hope that can continue and that as prosperity increases and the economy grows, many single people and couples who own houses and are unemployed have the opportunity to secure employment and will, therefore, be able to meet the mortgage payments set out for them.

The Central Bank, which is the regulator of credit institutions, asked all mortgage lenders to prepare and submit to it mortgage arrears resolution strategies and implementation plans. Mr. Matthew Elderfield explained this when we met him on a number of occasions. Following the submission of those plans, the Central Bank commenced an in-depth engagement process with all lenders to assess their validity, the sectors into which they were divided, and the areas of the country to which these referred. The reason for that was to ensure every lender had an effective strategy in place to deal with all mortgage holders experiencing difficulties. Arising from this, banks had to refine their proposals because the regulator was not happy with them and they committed to the Central Bank to build on existing so-called forbearance solutions to extend the range of alternative solutions to deal with genuinely distressed mortgage holders. The main lenders have completed the segmentation of their loan books and submitted to the Central Bank the options they propose to implement to deal with distressed mortgages. These include split and trade-down mortgages, restructuring of mortgage payments and forbearance.

I hope that in dealing with persons with distressed mortgages or who are in difficulties, the solutions required by the Central Bank of the lenders to which the banks have committed themselves and the introduction of the Insolvency Service of Ireland will provide alternatives to the banks that are open to anybody to avail of if they so wish. It is hoped the Bill will be passed this week and be in operation in the early spring. That is one element of dealing with complex and sensitive issues. The other is to drive the economy to a point where people who are unemployed or on low incomes or who may have lost their jobs will be able to get back into the world of employment, contribute and meet the requirements under the conditions of their mortgages. In some cases, as has been pointed out, banks must look at some element of write-down in particular circumstances, but I hope the level of repossessions will be very small.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach for his response and, at the outset, acknowledge the enormity of the challenge facing the Government in this area. I welcome the Taoiseach's commitment to getting the Insolvency Agency of Ireland up and running, and I take it that he has said this will happen in the first quarter of 2013.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach referred to the fact the Government has come up with a number of initiatives. He must accept they have had a minor impact. The last time I read about the rent-to-buy initiative, it appeared that one person was involved. I know the voluntary housing sector is working with AIB in particular to do something about people in arrears. The number of people who are benefiting is infinitesimally small relative to the growing number of people in distress. Deputy Adams rightly referred to the 180,000 mortgages that are in distress, and that figure might exceed the 200,000 mark by the time the Insolvency Service of Ireland is up and running.

What does the Taoiseach envisage in terms of the capacity of the agency to deal with the vast number of cases that will face it? I also wish to refer to the impact of the property tax on the buy to let sector which is now in considerable difficulty. I understand 100,000 people are on local authority waiting lists. The Central Bank has described the pillar banks as continuing to be in denial. As a result of the budget additional burdens will be placed on those who have buy to let properties, are in negative equity and at risk of repossession. They will carry the burden of the property tax, and this is in parallel with the work being done by the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, who we can say in a general sense has a mandate to do something about the €500 million a year spent on rent subsidy. If the Government is driving down rent subsidy but also increasing the cost burden on those in arrears in the buy to rent market, it will store up additional problems for us. What will happen to the tenants, many of them very ordinary people-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is straying a little.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps so but perhaps the Taoiseach will give me a little flexibility and address the issue.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I gave the Deputy a little flexibility.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Ceann Comhairle did and I thank him.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There should be an opportunity in the new year for a broader discussion on this with the Minister of State with responsibility for housing, Deputy O'Sullivan, and with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Minister for Finance. Nobody has been standing up for the banks, nor do I but they have changed their attitude. I understand they have trained personnel to speak directly to people in mortgage distress or arrears and quite a number have been restructured and this is to be welcomed. The insolvency agency support through the legislation will provide an alternative method of dealing with serious debt for people and banks know this. From their perspective it would be far better to be able to work out a solution for people in distress or mortgage arrears in whatever category. I hope the words I hear will be seen to be implemented because this is of enormous importance and there is pressure on people every day.

I cannot provide the Deputy with the work schedule of the insolvency director but he is in situ with staff to back him up. I am sure we can supply the Deputy with their tentative proposals which would be in everybody's interests. I would like to see in the spring, either at Oireachtas committee level or in the House, an opportunity to discuss the ongoing work of the insolvency agency when it has been established to see how effective it can be. As the Deputy knows, from its drafting to its conclusion this week, the Bill has been very complex and technical. I hope that with all of these measures and with the projected growth in the economy, the situation for people with mortgages, particularly those in arrears or in distress, will improve.

Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Taoiseach explain how the Economic Management Council functions as a sub-committee of the Cabinet? Is it the case that virtually the entire budget announced for 2013 was decided by four members of the Cabinet and announced to the full Cabinet only at the last minute? Is it the case that the Economic Management Council has acted in a secret and authoritarian fashion? From what we have heard we could compare it to a Stalinist politburo concentrating huge power in a few hands and operating in great secrecy. How does this equate to the democratic revolution the Taoiseach promised at the beginning of this Dáil? Is it the case that because there is a coalition government the council and its operation is a preservation mechanism for the leadership of the two parties, Fine Gael and the Labour Party? Essentially they treat their backbenchers like tunnel mushrooms, keeping them in the dark on key issues, dumping on them the austerity decisions which have great public distaste and then simply picking them to come in and vote for them. From where does this modus operandi come and what justifies it?

The Taoiseach paid a glowing tribute to homeowners in regard to the upkeep of their homes, paying their mortgages, etc. He has always held this position, but in 1994 he felt a property tax was a vampire tax which would drive a stake through the heart of homeownership and suck the lifeblood of people who want to own their own homes and better their conditions. What has changed the Taoiseach's mind on this?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Last year in preparation for the budget for 2012, as soon as the Dáil came back in September every week there was a rash of speculation about what would be cut, which certainly had a direct impact on consumer confidence and retail because people quite rightly decided to hold tight because they did not know what was going to happen. This year the budget was discussed and approved collectively by the Cabinet. It is a requirement that it be signed off by the Cabinet. The preparation for this was not just conducted by the Economic Management Council. Individual face to face and bilateral meetings were held between the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and each Minister on the ceiling for each Department and proposals for savings, and all of these were signed off at bilateral level. It came through the Economic Management Council and then on to the Government.

This year there was not the same level of public comment, except I noticed wild speculation that the old age pension would be cut, free travel and free light would be stopped, the period for free fuel would be shortened and the allowance would be stopped, and carers allowance and the home care package would be cut. There were also extraordinary remarks about the scale of the property tax and that it would run to thousands of euro. The same speculation was made in comments about the requirement to deal with pollution from septic tanks in various parts of the country and the extraordinary amount this would cost. Obviously these were very different in reality.

The year 1994 was a very different space. We have had the obscenity of several Governments in between shovelling out mountains of money which did not belong to us and which somebody would have to pay back.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach told them to give out more.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In this sense we have had to focus on how to rectify this problem and believe me it is not easy. In the past 15 months things have begun to turn towards the right direction. Serious challenges still face the people. As I stated, the assistance of our European colleagues is something we need. It is not a case of a quartet deciding on every element of the budget. All of the bilateral meetings took place.

Ministers agreed on Votes and figures for their respective Departments and then that was discussed collectively, signed off collectively and approved collectively by the Cabinet as is its responsibility. The Minister for whatever Department would not be aware of the detailed discussions about another Minister's Department until such time as the Cabinet would come together collectively on that.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the Cabinet sub-committee on mortgage arrears, did this committee meet with the troika and discuss its demand that legislative impediments to banks repossessing family homes should be a priority for the Government? It is difficult to tally the Taoiseach's soothing words about the low level of repossessions in the country and his assurances that the personal insolvency agency will protect home owners from the loss of their family homes with the simultaneous demand by the troika that legal impediments to the right of banks to repossess family homes should be a priority. Did this committee discuss that with them and could they explain their rationale in making this demand? Is it not the case, consequently, given this demand, that those with mortgages, particularly distressed mortgages, should be fearful because our troika masters are demanding that banks should be able to repossess more homes?

On the Economic Management Council it is clear from the protections, in terms of low corporate tax rate and a refusal to impose the financial transaction tax, that the submissions of the banks and groups such as the clearing house group were listened to by the Economic Management Council. Is it equally obvious that the Economic Management Council did not listen to the plethora of civil society groups and groups dealing with poverty, such as the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Social Justice Ireland and the trade unions, which were representing the least well off and struggling sections in society and which made submission after submission asking that the burden of austerity in the budget should not fall on those who are already struggling to survive? Is it the case that the Economic Management Council, the inner cabal of the Government, listened only to one section of society - the troika, the banks, the very wealthy - and simply refused to listen to and ignored the civil society and other group organisations that represented ordinary citizens - low and middle income earners, the unemployed and the vulnerable in society? Is there something radically wrong with the way this inner cabal of the Government is deporting itself, in listening only to one minority section of society and not listening at all to the voices of the majority?

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are no marks for that. The Economic Management Council did not meet the troika. The Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform regularly met the troika in regard to the memorandum of understanding and the fulfilling of the conditions of the bailout programme, but the troika did not meet the Economic Management Council.

The question of the troika putting forward its view that legal clarification was required in regard to the consequences of the Dunne judgment dealing with mortgages is something that had to be dealt with and that legal clarification will be provided following the setting up of the insolvency service. That is not to be taken as any indication of a rash of house repossessions. I already made the case on that to Deputies Ó Fearghaíl and Adams.

I answered Deputy Boyd Barrett previously on the financial transaction tax. We have objected to the financial transaction tax. We have not participated in the enhanced co-operation at European level for that tax. Ireland imposes stamp duty on transactions. Clearly, we did not want to place the International Financial Services Centre at a disadvantage to London if none applied there. The Commission, in its own documents, reported on the financial transaction, but I do not speak for other countries in this regard. Now that 11 of them have signed on for enhanced co-operation with regard to introducing a financial transaction tax, Ireland, as the incoming Presidency of the Union, will not impede that although, of course, we will need to know the conditions that apply to it.

The low corporate tax rate has been an important element of investment in this country over many years. The rate is 12.5%, 11.9% effective, across the board. As Deputy Boyd Barrett will be aware, in some of the other countries in Europe-----

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Rubbish. It is not 11.9%.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----different rates of corporate tax apply for different sectors and, indeed, in different regions, but in Ireland it is straightforward and transparent. It is an important element of the attractiveness of the country for investment.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not know from where the Taoiseach got 11.9%. That is a fantasy.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will not be changing that.