Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

D'airigh muid go leor leithscéalta ó Sheanadóirí an Rialtais. B'fhéidir gur cheart dóibh leithscéalta a ghabháil arís mar gheall go bhfuil siad ag tacú leis an rún seo, mar ní amhlaidh a rinne siad nuair a bhí siad sa bhFreasúra. Is léiriú eile é seo ar na U-casachaí breátha atá Seanadóirí an Rialtais ag déanamh inniu sa Seanad.

Two years ago Fianna Fáil, at the height of the last Government's unpopularity, pushed the Act through the Houses of the Oireachtas at break neck speed. The Act, alongside the banking guarantee, was a key pillar of Fianna Fáil's disastrous banking policy for which we are all still paying the price. Sinn Féin rejected it then and pointed out how dangerous the Act was. It contained a sunset clause which shows how controversial it was. The Act gave sweeping powers to the then Minister for Finance, the late Deputy Brian Lenihan. As Deputy Michael Noonan, then in opposition, correctly pointed out:

I am concerned about the role of the Governor of the Central Bank under this legislation. I would have expected resolution legislation to have conferred the special powers on the Governor of the Central Bank, rather than on the Minister. In this Bill the special powers are conferred on the Minister on all occasions. There is a section which states that the independence of the Governor of the Central Bank is not affected, but the powers taken by the Minister and the lack of additional powers being given to the Governor of the Central Bank are quite noticeable.

Senior bondholders should have been taken to the barbers at that time and given a haircut. The sentiment was echoed by Deputy Leo Varadkar at the time when he said:

It does not contain any provision for the restructuring of the debts of senior bondholders, particularly those who are not under the guarantee. There is perhaps up to ¤16 billion of taxpayers' money that could be saved by imposing and losses and haircuts on those bondholders. That is the key change of policy that needs to happen when we have a change of government in this country because the people are not responsible for the debts of those banks and should not be held liable for them. That is the big lacuna in this Bill.

The Fianna Fáil banking policy failed because it protected the banks at all costs. It was a bad policy then and it is a bad policy now. We know that the banks are still not lending to the real economy yet squeeze customers who simply cannot afford to pay their mortgages. They are spinning the numbers and recycling lending. They are not doing what they should and that is lending to the real economy.

In 2010 Fine Gael and the Labour Party did the right thing and rejected the legislation as being bad and rushed. Deputy Joan Burton, then the Labour Party's finance spokesperson, echoed the sentiments by stating:

Today's stopgap Bill is too little, too late. It is too late because the horse has bolted since the expiry of the original bank guarantee, and too little because it does nothing to address the treatment of liabilities other than subordinated bondholders. It fails to address the issue of senior bondholders now out of the guarantee, the debts for whom amount up to ¤20 billion.

Today the Fine Gael and Labour Party Government seeks to extend the Act. We shall vote on an extension of a failed law. It has clearly failed as bank lending shows yet the Labour Party and Fine Gael is asking us to extend the legislation that they opposed under a Fianna Fáil government. Section 69 is designed to let the Act slip into history and it should be allowed to. Sinn Féin will do what it did in 2010 by rejecting this bad legislation and I hope that others will show consistency too.