Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Some excellent points were made on related issues. In particular, Senators Craughwell and Wilson spoke about the problem of sweetheart deals and the behaviour of banks. I know of one builder in Galway, when a receiver was being appointed to properties with a view to banks selling these properties, who said he was not going to give them to the receiver. He wanted to do up the houses and have them ready for sale because the receiver would sell them at a low price thus leaving him with a higher remaining debt. That is the disgraceful treatment meted out to people who are trying to do honest business but got in trouble partly because of the bad behaviour of banks.

There is no validity to the Minister of State's response where he said that the rules of the superior courts may not be adjusted by the Minister. There is nothing that the Government cannot make possible through legislation, subject to the requirements of the Constitution. It would be within the ability and remit of the Minister to ask that rules be made. The Minister is already required to concur in rules being made by the courts. The power exists in the 2009 legislation to make regulations about receivership. Why not have powers to govern the conduct of receivers?Why not be more prescriptive in legislation, as that legislation would allow for the making of regulations? That is the reason I refer to the responses given here as being more at the level of schoolboy debating tactics, which try to nit pick in order to knock down a point. It is clear that if the will existed, the legislation could be brought forward by the Government. God knows, in recent times it has already brought forward some quite crazy legislation that goes against the public interest and has done so just because it can. I believe that where there is a serious problem disclosed by the behaviour of receivers, the Government could introduce the necessary legislation and regulations, whether under the 2009 legislation or in some other miscellaneous provisions legislation. Please do not insult the intelligence of Members of the House by saying the Minister cannot make rules, when legislation is all that is required to give the Minister the necessary powers to insist regulations be made.

I thank the Minister of State for the grudging acknowledgement that action is needed in this area and I look forward to the promised review into the conduct of receivers and to their coming before the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality in due course.