Seanad debates

Tuesday, 9 July 2013

Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Bill 2013: Second Stage

 

6:20 pm

Photo of Kathleen LynchKathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate Senator Crown's remarks. I genuinely believe that when Senators stand up to speak, they do so on behalf of the people, regardless of how they managed to get here. We all get to the Dáil or Seanad by different routes but, nevertheless, Members of the Oireachtas speak on behalf of the people. The voice of the people is the voice of God and that has always been my opinion. I believe fundamentally in democracy and that is why I take particular note of what is said in here. I appreciate very much some of the thoughtful considerations that are expressed here.

For the last two years, due to the awful problems that have befallen the country, I keep hearing from certain people that we need a new type of politics. They say the old politics did not work, so new politics are required. The very people who shout that at me are the same ones who, when I give open responses, revert to type with the old politics. They start telling us about typical U-turns and say the Government is no different to any other, yet they are the very people who refer to the need for new politics, which always amazes and amuses me.

I always take criticism on the basis that people have a genuine concern about certain issues. We should take the pressure that is put on Government Ministers in all sorts of areas as a call to arms, a call to do something about a particular issue. There are some matters we can do nothing about, while we can deal with others. That type of pressure, however, ensures that these issues get the attention they deserve.

While some Senators were not as genuine as others, virtually everyone who contributed today had a genuine concern about people who are in danger of losing their homes. One can talk about lenders and borrowers, including mortgage holders, but we are discussing people's homes. I cannot imagine a worse scenario than having to return to one's spouse and children and tell them that they have to leave the family home. None of us can imagine that and I hope none of us will ever have to do it. Many people have to leave their homes, however, and it is something the Government has to do more about.

Senator Byrne said that judges do not have any alternative to granting repossessions, but they do. Judges make these decisions every day of the week. In a recent court case, a judge decided not to grant an order for repossession because the bank did not act honourably or in the manner it should have. Judges, therefore, have incredible powers of discretion which are used daily.

Senator Mullen was anxious that every assistance should be given to those in debt to ensure that they are not put out of their homes willy-nilly. The Bill deals with that matter clearly via a two-month adjournment period. In the event that that is not enough to allow the insolvency programme to kick in, there is an opportunity for a further adjournment. That is very important because, as Senator MacSharry said, this will be an issue for negotiation. When the rules become clearer, such negotiations will be happening more and more.

I agree with Senators Crown and Barrett. I do not believe that all bankers are bad and, by the same token, I do not believe that all politicians are bad either. Having said that, however, we need to be extraordinarily careful that, given the circumstances we find ourselves in, we do not give exceptional powers to enable lenders to render people homeless.

I concur with Senator Hayden whose contributions on housing are not just thoughtful and considered but also very knowledgeable. The legislation is about what happens when the action for possession occurs. We believe that the insolvency service will be up and running in a few weeks. The Senator's points, which were well made, have already been thought out and discussed in terms of what action comes first.

Senator Mullen referred to people being able to stay in their homes and rent them. I am a great believer in cross-government co-operation, but the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is proactively working on this issue. The mortgage-to-rent scheme, to facilitate families to stay in their homes, is currently being worked on. However, I will bring the Senator's views to the Minister's attention.

How could we disagree with what Senator Hayden said about people who are living in such circumstances? Sometimes we imagine that buy-to-let properties comprise a separate little nest egg waiting for the market to rise again so that they can be sold, but these are people's homes.

That is where they live and it is something on which we must take careful views. Again, it will be about ensuring that people who live there will not simply be turfed out as a result of the banks repossessing those homes. All of those points were well made.

In response to Senator Crown, we cannot sustain a legal system in which lenders’ rights to repossess are in doubt. The Bill is clear. Members have made grandiose speeches, some of ten pages long – I do not refer to Senator Crown – about the fact that we are so concerned about the possibility of people’s homes being put on the line. We must ensure that the legal system is robust and that when loopholes are identified they are addressed. I like Senator Barrett’s point that when the common man wins it is a loophole. I will take that on board. I assure Members that all of their points will be brought to the attention of the Minister and he will respond himself in a more fulsome manner. I thank Members for their contributions.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.