Michael D'Arcy (Wexford, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senators. I want to touch on the issue of when the commencement orders will be made in respect of the establishment. When we conclude within the House, I hope this week, the Bill will go to the Attorney General's office in respect of the commencement order. I do not think there is a requirement for an early signature or anything of that nature. It is going to go through the process and become law as quickly as possible.

Senator Boyhan raised the issue of the funding model. As a result of having two offices, there were two different streams. There is a dual funding structure in place at present. It is appropriate that the financial services providers should fund the ombudsman's service in respect of financial services products, since the ombudsman helps them resolve complaints as well as allowing consumers to raise them. The ombudsman replaced voluntary schemes which the industry had in place.

In respect of pensions, many of the complaints pertain to public sector schemes. It is appropriate that they should be paid for from public funds. In addition, we do not want to discourage people from taking out pensions, which could be the case if the cost of a levy was too great. There was a previous structure within both offices which has been streamlined into one.

Senator Conway-Walsh asked if expenditure can be allowed within delegated sanctions. It would be the intention that the ombudsman would be allowed to operate within delegated sanctions. That is the way every other Government agency operates. There are clear sanctions and amounts within the HSE and other Government agencies. If one goes beyond that, there is a requirement for consent from the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. This is putting in place exactly what applies to every other Government agency. There is nothing different here. It is not the intention that the ombudsman would have to seek the approval and consent of the two Ministers each time he needs to engage consultants or advisers, but it is necessary that expenditure of taxpayers' funds is subject to the appropriate oversight. There is a lot of focus on expenditure on consultants, coming from all sides of the House.

The line between pensions and financial services is no longer completely straight. There is a significant crossover and the lines have become blurred because of the products that are being sold at the moment. As a result, this is the opportunity to be able to assess those financial services that may be a pension or have some features of a pension. It is the main reason the bodies are merging.

The issue of whole-of-life policies were raised. My role as the Minister of State with responsibility for financial services is a promotional role. I promote the sector very strongly and vigorously. Many people are employed in this industry in the State. I support that fully. However, I want to be very clear that if there is any sharp practice occurring, I want people to bring it to my attention. If there is sharp practice, I will do the very best I can to deal with it within my period as Minister of State with responsibility for financial services. The matter of whole-of-life policies has been brought to my attention. A number of constituents have come to me. It is very wrong that elderly people are being charged massive annual premiums to continue their policies. Some of these people have paid into a policy for decades. If they live another year or two, and please God they will, the premium becomes so high they effectively lose all they have paid over the period. That is not playing the game fairly. I want to be very clear about this. I take a very dim view of someone taking advantage of the rules and how they are allowed to apply them.

In respect of a point made by Senator Kieran O'Donnell, I agree with him that there should not be a need for an ombudsman. I would love if there was not. There can be very legitimate disputes on both sides, however. The ombudsman's office is there to be fair and impartial and to try to come to a conclusion on matters without recourse to the courts. That is what it is for. The likes of what I just mentioned is not playing fair. If the financial services I promote and support are not doing it properly, there will be a cost.