Thomas Byrne (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

My question relates to a different matter. I am seconding the motion. I propose that the Leader offers a full debate on the judgment of Miss Justice Elizabeth Dunne in July 2011 before we start hearing rhetoric blaming the previous Government.

I understand that a new deal with IMF has been done by this Government which will reverse the impact of the Dunne judgment and allow repossessions to happen en masse. The Dunne judgment relates to an interpretation of the Land Law and Conveyancing Act 2009 which effectively slows up many repossessions. That judgment should not be interfered with and should be legislated for very quickly to protect people. We should also look again at the family home Bill that Senator MacSharry, the rest of my Fianna Fáil colleagues and I put forward and which all the Independent Senators supported. We will not accept a new IMF deal negotiated by this Government. What has the Government got in return from agreeing to repossessions? Have the people of Ireland achieved anything from this, why did it have to be agreed by this Government and why is the IMF interfering in what is effectively an interpretation of Irish statute law? What business is it of the IMF? We were constantly criticised by this Government for the deal done in November 2010 but this is a new deal negotiated by this Government. I do not know the reasons for it and we need a full debate in the Seanad to find out the reasons for this new IMF deal on repossessions.