Seanad debates
Wednesday, 22 May 2013
Criminal Justice (Unlicensed Money-Lending) Bill 2013: Second Stage
3:45 pm
Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source
I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
I thank the Minister for taking the time to come into the House. As he is no doubt aware, illegal moneylending is an increasing scourge on our society. Unfortunately, the crime figures do not bear that out because, as the Minister is all too aware, there has never been a conviction for illegal moneylending in Ireland. There is a great deal of law governing this area but, unfortunately, its victims are not sufficiently protected in terms of coming forward and giving evidence against the accused when the accused, or agents of same, is likely to be in a position to intimidate them on their way out of the courthouse or elsewhere.
In terms of legislation, unlicensed moneylending is mentioned in the Consumer Credit Act. The penalties include up to five years imprisonment as well as fines. The offences perpetrated in terms of the criminality involved and the methods of collection these people use are governed under sections 10 and 11 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act and the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994. While there have been many convictions under those sections of those Bills, it is not possible to say specifically the crimes to which they were related, although it is certain, from the Minister's responses to parliamentary questions in the other House, that there have not been any convictions for this particular crime.
The situation is exacerbated in a recession where there is a need for social finance in our new regulatory regime. People are being forced in the first instance into the hands of Provident plc and other such lending institutions which, strangely, can legally charge up to 200% and employ questionable methods of collection activities in terms of the persistence with which they contact people and so on. They are the lender of last resort in terms of officialdom, and when people cannot make those payments, they are forced into the hands of the illegal moneylenders. Many of them are involved in serious criminality throughout the country, including intimidation and violence and in terms of the persistence with which they threaten people and vary the principal people owe rather than simply applying interest rates, however high they may be.
It also seems from discussions with gardaí, community groups and those trying to prevent this particular crime that the perpetrators are well-known but we do not have the evidence to convict them. The victims are people preparing for children to go back to school or those with the expense of a first holy communion, a family wedding, schoolbooks, children going to college, an electricity bill or simply putting food on the table. As we know anecdotally from our clinics these are real problems people have on a daily basis. They go to these moneylenders and then suffer serious consequences.
I must mention Communities Against Illegal Lending of Money, CAILM, in Sligo which has done significant work on creating awareness on the issue and encouraging alternatives such as community banks where people save over a period of time. Cranmore, which is a large estate in Sligo, has the Cranmore community bank which works very well. CAILM takes a three tiered approach encompassing prevention, alternatives and enforcement. It also educates through telling people where they can go for social finance. We are falling down when it comes to enforcement. I am aware of two cases in the north west where files were sent to the DPP but, as with many other cases, the victims did not come forward as they did not have enough confidence in the system to protect them. On summary conviction one faces quite a small fine and or a maximum prison sentence of 12 months. I do not believe any cases have been heard on indictment but in such a case the maximum sentence is five years in prison.
The Bill offers a very small spoke in the wheel to deal with these issues. It will give additional protection to people whereby on conviction the court can hand down an order to prohibit the perpetrator and his or her agents contacting by any means the victim in an effort to get away from the intimidation and give people confidence. The Bill also states if there is not enough evidence to convict but the judge is satisfied there is a clear issue of intimidation an order to prohibit contact can be handed down. This is to encourage people to come forward so these moneylenders can be convicted by providing safeguards which do not exist at present. While illegal money lending and violence against an individual are crimes, in practice the victims of this particular crime fall between two stools. This is a small advancement. It is non-adversarial and could be embraced by the Government.
The tradition, certainly for members of Fianna Fáil, is that Private Members' motions do not tend to be accepted, for no other reason than they are Fianna Fáil motions. The Independent Senators enjoy better success in this regard, as it seems more palatable for the Government of the day to accept their Bills on Second Stage. This is not a criticism exclusively of the current Government nor is it an absolution for previous governments which had the same practice. I very much hope in the interests of groups such as CAILM - Senator O'Keeffe is well aware of its work and supports it - that we take steps in this area. It is incumbent on us to do so.
Moneylenders prey on society and those who are at their most vulnerable, who are unemployed, have no money and have exhausted all avenues, perhaps including social welfare. In the regulatory regime we now have it is increasingly more difficult for credit unions to make social finance available. The Bill is small, and other supplementary measures would be required with regard to the delivery of social finance. We must examine the models in the UK where its Assets Recovery Agency, Department for Work and Pensions and other agencies have come together to successfully secure approximately 100 convictions in recent years for this particular crime.
The Bill provides for a prison sentence of 14 years, which is a significant increase on the five year sentence which exists at present because it is not a deterrent to criminals. As I have stated, there have been no convictions and I do not believe there will be until we can demonstrably afford additional protection to victims. We humbly believe this is a step in this direction and we very much hope the Minister will be in a position to accept it on Second Stage and add the benefit of his party and the coalition's brilliance to enhance it further on Committee Stage.
This issue is predominantly urban. Sligo is not unique and large urban centres throughout the country such as Limerick and Dublin have been affected by this crime. I very much hope we can extend some element of hope to the victims of this crime and to society by taking this step to provide them with additional protection to ensure they are encouraged to come forward and testify against these criminals.
I pay tribute and thank councillor Deirdre Heney, who was very much involved in helping to draw up the legislation and in researching the existing legislation which governs this area. The figures speak for themselves as we have had no convictions. There is much law but no justice. We believe this is but one small spoke in a wheel of many spokes to assist in this area. I very much hope the Minister will be able to embrace this legislative initiative in the spirit with which it has been tabled.
No comments