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

I will be brief, as we dealt with the issue of whether it should be a one-year or three-year period on Second Stage. First, the three-year period is chosen because it is the average period in most European Union countries. England is an outlier in that it has a one-year period. Second, we must have a balance in the legislation as between debtors and creditors and must give creditors some reasonable opportunity of recovering some moneys due to them. Third, what we do in this Parliament should not be determined by Westminster. We stopped that in 1922 and must make our own judgment on these things. Fourth, some individuals who clearly have their centre of interest in and are resident in this State have found themselves refused access to the bankruptcy structure in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. In that context, we must make our own decisions.

It is annoying to see some individuals go to England and seek to extricate themselves. However, there are other issues. Why would people try to have their circumstances dealt with here? The answer is that Northern Ireland and England do not have the equivalent of our personal insolvency arrangement, which creates the possibility of non-judicial debt settlement for secured debt. That is not available in the United Kingdom. There are a number of reasons. On balance, the Government was of the view that three years should be the timeframe.

When we came into government, the legal position was that somebody could be bankrupt for their lifetime, as the provisions in the context of the period of bankruptcy had not been reformed since colonial times. We reduced the period in the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011 to 12 years and are now reducing it to three years. We want to ensure that the three-year period is a real three-year period and that it cannot be extended beyond that. Hence, I made my previous comments in that regard. In the UK and in Ireland, if someone is fraudulent going into bankruptcy and does not make full and proper disclosure of income or assets, the bankruptcy period in both jurisdictions will be extendable. I do not believe this Parliament should have its substantive law determined by the Westminster Parliament. The majority of people in major financial trouble will not go over to the United Kingdom to have their circumstances dealt with there. They will deal with them under our domestic law. We think we have achieved the appropriate balance in this legislation.

Proposals on bankruptcy will come from the European Union in December. We hope to consider these and that will form part of the work we will do during the Irish Presidency. We will examine those provisions in the context of how there can be more harmony across the European Union in jurisdiction issues dealing with the bankruptcy area. However, the likelihood is that the United Kingdom will not opt into those provisions and the current position will remain as it is there for the foreseeable future.