Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister, I misheard him previously. I have taken a note of that. That is important. I welcome that also.

I am concerned about the broad remit of financial services that trustees of pension funds seem to be boasting that they are hundreds of millions in debt. Some of them think the Minister will bail them out, which is most worrying as well.

I also am greatly concerned about the auditing issue and note the Minister mentioned the Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority. I consulted the website of one such body, namely, the Chartered Accountants Regulatory Board, which seemingly deals with matters like someone doing the books for a small cattle market down the country and so on. However - this is applicable to all the matters under discussion - the "Big Four" audit firms appear to have prepared accounts for Irish banks on which the State bought into those banks and yet nothing happens. Again, I am thinking of the popular expression of these matters. I accept the Minister's remarks and the changes he has noted but there is a wish for stricter regulation of the activities of these industries and a perception that we have been too slow in addressing it.

On the debt collection agencies, I again greatly welcome the Minister's comments. Concerns were expressed in the House that what one might call "heavies" or criminal elements were being used to collect debts by the Irish banks and I am delighted to hear from the Minister that the Central Bank wishes to control such activities. The other activity I had in mind in framing these amendments was a scheme - in south Dublin I believe - whereby one paid in money and the organisation concerned undertook to pay one's bills. This activity did not seem to be regulated although many people would regard it as a service and it caused great distress to those who entrusted their money to those persons.

While I appreciate the improvements the Minister has mentioned, I am surprised that pensions were not included but I accept this is what the expert report indicated. It is of concern to everyone in the House that serious pension problems exist in respect of building societies. They operated under a loose regime of regulation from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and none now remain. That is the penalty of running their affairs so badly and one could have done with better regulation in that regard. I have mentioned the pension funds but I still have concerns about the auditors and accountants, in that it seems like light-touch regulation to me or, in the case of the "Big Four" with regard to bank accounts, no-touch regulation.

As for the last sentence, what I had in mind was a scenario in which someone invents new financial services into which people put their money only to subsequently lose it and that service was not within the definition. The case I had for the broad definition was that the Central Bank should be able to intervene before people's money is lost. However, I am pleased by and welcome the Minister's comments on the positive side and will not press the amendments. This Bill now before the House started off in 2011 and were one writing it in the past week, one might have more stricter and more stern thoughts, given the damage to the political and business scene as a result of the tapes. However, I thank the Minister and look forward to Report Stage. I will not press the amendments at this Stage but I am grateful to the Minister, as always, for his enlightenment on these issues.