Seanad debates

Tuesday, 2 July 2013

Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Bill 2011: Report and Final Stages

 

4:30 pm

Photo of Brian HayesBrian Hayes (Dublin South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It is not fair to say we are in disagreement on this. I hope people outside the House will listen to what I have to say. We would expect in the normal course of events that the Central Bank would engage in discussion with the various agencies to which the Senator referred in his amendment, namely, the Competition Authority and the National Competitiveness Council. In the normal course of events such discussions will take place.

I agree that wider influences would have to be brought to bear in making any regulations. The section is about consultation before regulations occur. Specifying one or two agencies may lead to difficulties, rather than stating a bank be given the power to consult with whatever it so chooses because it is independent of Government. It represents the Irish taxpayer and the ECB system, one could argue, given its legislative role, but in its functions it is independent of political interference. I have absolute no difficulty in saying to the Senator publicly that we expect this would happen in the normal course of events. It may be an issue on which the Governor wants to comment when he comes before committees or is questioned by Members of Parliament. To stitch it into the legislation is not necessary per se but we appreciate the point the Senator is making.

As I said, if one included two agencies there would be an argument for including 105 other agencies. There are only 48 because we got rid of half of the quangos. Why would one limit the Bill to that? There is nothing to stop banks from having the consultation we expect in the normal course of events.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.