Seanad debates

Thursday, 20 June 2013

Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Bill 2011: Second Stage

 

1:40 pm

Photo of Michael D'ArcyMichael D'Arcy (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

This is very important legislation. It is a pity it was not on the Statute Book a number of years ago as we might not have ended up in the current mess. The mess is due to a failure not just of politics but also of the regulatory regime that was in place. Indeed, it is more accurate to say there was no regulatory regime in place.

I did not hear all of the Minister's speech. However, as Senator Barrett and I have said previously, in this small city there has been a far too cosy relationship for too long between the bankers, regulators and primary legal companies who advised the Department of Finance, the Central Bank and the banks. The Minister mentioned it too in respect of the auditors. It beggars belief how the auditing regime was allowed to continue and that nobody has been brought to task about how the auditors were satisfied with what happened and how it was almost facilitated. I look forward to a significant tightening up in that area, in particular. Dublin is a small city and when one is involved in a sector in this city one finds that too many people know each other. Indeed, occasionally some legal companies were advising both the financial institution and the Central Bank.

I greatly welcome the whistleblower section. This State does not have a great history of whistleblowing. To some extent people who carry out that action, even though they are doing the right thing, are treated badly afterwards. It is as if they cannot be trusted. We are slowly getting to the position we should have with regard to giving people the protection that is required if they are acting in the general interest rather than in the interest of an institution.

The Minister concluded by saying something that I consider to be crucial in this Bill. He said it requires balance, proportionality and judgment. That is true. We are anxious to tighten up the regime but we do not wish to make it so tight that it does not allow the important financial sector to trade. I saw a note from the Central Bank yesterday which stated that the investment funds resident in Ireland at the end of the first quarter this year have increased by €82 billion and that the net asset value at the end of that quarter is €1,014 billion. It is a huge industry that is crucial for this country and employs many people as well. While it is absolutely essential to ensure we get this legislation correct, the Minister's point about balance, proportionality and judgment is also relevant. I look forward to dealing with these issues in more detail on later Stages.

I wish to raise a matter which I consider to be relevant. The code of conduct for mortgage arrears is obligatory for the financial institutions that have a banking licence from the State, but something has been brought to my attention on more occasions than is satisfactory.

There are people within financial institutions whose clients are coming to the bank because of mortgage distress but they are not being informed about the mortgage arrears resolution process, MARP. I am making a very serious accusation that there are individuals within financial institutions who are not telling people in mortgage distress about the mortgage process which they are obliged to disclose. People are not being given the information.

I raised the matter on the Order of Business last week and to my dissatisfaction, I have again received a call from a constituent where it became clear the person in question knew nothing about the MARP or the code of conduct for mortgage arrears from the Central Bank. If somebody working for a bank is doing a job contrary to rules and regulations that we know and understand are intended to help a client in mortgage distress, the bank worker should be fired. That would send a very clear message to anybody who may be trying to make a name within a financial institution that he or she is tougher than other guys and is able to get more money from people than others. It would be a good message to send to individuals within a bank. The ultimate sanction in these cases is that a banking licence can be revoked but that is very unlikely; an ultimate sanction for an individual is a sacking.

That is not on the books or within this legislation, and perhaps this is not the appropriate Bill for such a measure. Nevertheless, I am glad to raise the matter when there are officials from the Department of Finance in the Chamber. It is not good enough and the next time I find an individual from a banking institution is doing this to citizens and constituents of mine, I will name him or her in the Chamber.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.