Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

The proposed amendment changes the provisions relating to the membership of the regulatory authority so as to provide that the Minister for Finance may designate the Director of Consumer Affairs as an official member of that authority. However, the Bill allows for this possibility. The proposed new section 33E(2) of the principal Act, as inserted by section 26 of the Bill, provides that the Minister may, instead of appointing a person to be a member of the regulatory authority, designate the holder of a specified office as an official member of that authority. That power, although stated in more abstract language, is already conferred on the Minister in the Bill.

The Director of Consumer Affairs is the holder of a specified office within the meaning of the Bill and the current wording of subsection (2) leaves it open to the Minister to appoint the director as an official member of the regulatory authority. The proposed amendment is superfluous. Its purpose is already comprehended by the legislation and there is no difficulty about designating the Director of Consumer Affairs as a member of the regulatory authority. It is permitted under the legislation. On that technical ground, I oppose the amendment.

This might be the appropriate time to address the wider question raised by the Senator about the combination of the two functions of prudential regulation and consumer protection. That has been the main focus of the criticism of the Bill from the political interest represented by the Senator. The Central Bank is responsible for the prudential supervision of financial institutions operating in the State, such as banks and building societies, while the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment supervises the insurance industry. The Director of Consumer Affairs has certain responsibilities under the Consumer Credit Act 1995 in relation to financial service providers, including responsibilities in respect of charges and advertising.