Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

In response to Senator Cullinane, he might be interested to know that the Northern Ireland legislation was enacted by the Northern Ireland Assembly and I am sure all these issues were teased out there. I keep on saying we are trying to provide a balance in the Bill between the rights of creditors and the position of debtors and allow people to maintain some reasonable standard of living and have reasonable living expenses available to them.

I cannot accede to Senator Cullinane's proposal. I do not want to make a commitment that would change the Bill, but I am prepared to reflect on the issue of the value of the car between now and Report Stage. We had a similar exchange in the Dáil.

I must be careful that we do not create a situation where, in advance of someone trying to utilise the debt relief notice provisions, perhaps in the context of a credit union loan to buy a car where there was a debt, the credit union decides to seize the car in advance of the possibility of a debt relief notice being put in place because, as one should not forget, once it is put in place there are certain protections against court proceedings, but not necessarily against seizure around which there is an interesting technical problem. I cannot accede to the proposal for ¤3,000. I cannot in any circumstances accede to the proposal that there be a car of unlimited value retained.

I have addressed the issues of the maintenance of children and children's education. Perhaps the Senator who proposed that measure will not move the amendment concerned. Children are protected in relation to school equipment and the maintenance issue of children is part of what we deal with in the context of reasonable living expenses.