Larry Butler (Fianna Fail)

I agree with the views of Senator Harris, and other speakers, on this section. On Monday night the Minister stated clearly that we could not put the mortgage section - people who have mortgages - into NAMA because it was structured to ensure that taxpayers' money is protected as much as possible in this legislation. We will go after developers, builders and whoever else owes money to the banks to ensure that the taxpayer will not suffer and therefore special legislation will have to be introduced. I covered that issue on the first day I spoke in the debate. The special legislation could provide for a moratorium of 12 months whereby the lender and the borrower could come together and there would be no penalty clause for the borrower if he or she got into trouble. If the borrower got his or her job back or his circumstances improved, the extra year allowed could be added on to the end of the mortgage. That is one way of doing it. If two people lost their jobs and were unable to meet their mortgage commitments we would have to examine the possibility of the bank having a rental scheme to suit people like that.

Senator Harris is right. This will have to be done because if we do not do it we will wind up with another agency to deal with this aspect. We should ensure that the legislation covers all banks in this State, not just the six banks we guaranteed. We have sub-prime lenders who are bringing their clients to court at the moment. They are the people outside of the system who are the hardest to deal with and we should bring in legislation to deal with that but it must be separate legislation. The Minister said he is looking at that question. We can spend all day here talking about the other problem. Let us deal with this problem. This is the hand we have been dealt.

There was some confusion in the debate last night on the €54 billion. That is an estimated value. We may have to review downwards that valuation when due diligence takes place. That is the reality. With the best will in the world, and we do not all have a crystal ball to look into to get the answers we want, this is the best guesstimate we can come up with at present. It is important that we pass good legislation to ensure this Bill works well when it is put to the test. There has been very good debate on the Bill and no guillotine has been imposed. We had a late night last night, and I must say I work better early in the day. One does not do as well at night-time.

This is a business Bill. There are three arms to this Bill: the special purpose vehicle, the credit system that will create, and the business sector. The first objective is to get credit flowing, and that is where our valuation and our bond system comes in. That goes back in to ensure the banks have money to lend. We then have the special purpose vehicle which will have an investment sector. That will kick in and then we have NAMA, which is the main agency to ensure that we have a working relationship with all three. On the basis of that, and the legislation we are drawing up here, we should have a reasonable prospect of ensuring we get lending back into the banking system again. Our banking system will be much healthier after this measure but it is our job, as public representatives, to ensure that the taxpayer is not exposed. We have covered that in the Bill by ensuring that if there is a shortfall the banks will have to pick up the Bill.

I thank the Acting Chairman for the time given. We should not spend too much time considering what might happen in terms of the ordinary mortgage holder. We must now bring in legislation urgently to deal with that.