David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The Minister spent ten minutes attacking Fianna Fáil. He is entitled to his views and I share many of the sentiments that he expressed. However, we have 120 amendments before us. I hope that this does not become a Punch and Judy show for the next couple of hours and that we can get down to the business of dealing with the amendments. The Minister needs to take some responsibility for his comments in this regard. He tried to take us down a cul-de-sac, but we should avoid those.

Regarding the banking sector and its powers, it is not right of the Minister to claim that the banks do not have a veto. He knows that the banks have complete power over personal insolvency arrangements. This is one of the central critiques of the Bill by many parties as well as individuals outside the political establishment. We all accept that the Bill's provisions are a step forward, but suggesting that the banks are in any way being forced to compromise does not match the reality of those provisions.

I will stick to the amendments, as we have many to discuss during the coming hours.

This will facilitate arrangements being entered into with creditors that may result in some levels of debt forgiveness or debt forbearance and that will allow people within a prescribed period of years to work their way out of the financial difficulties in which they find themselves. Personal insolvency arrangements, which would apply to secured debt as well as unsecured debt, are relevant to individuals who have borrowed money on foot of security on property, in particular residential and commercial property. Debt settlement arrangements would apply to unsecured debt, which may be debt owing to banks.

Those Senators who followed the debate on this Bill as it went through the Lower House and headed into this House might notice that the Irish Banking Federation is extremely unenthusiastic about some of the mechanisms contained in this particular measure.