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

I thank Senators for their remarks and acknowledge the widespread support for the change from three to five years. When we sat down with Deputy Pearse Doherty initially we agreed three years but I have no big problem with changing it to five years. If the insurance industry can provide data covering three years, then it can also provide it for five. That said, I must put it on the record that the Central Bank has expressed reservations about the additional years provision and has said that it may lead to extra costs for insurers. Furthermore, it is complex as it will apply to many classes of insurance. It is important that the House is aware that the Central Bank expressed that view to me. I also met representatives of Insurance Ireland on this matter and they also expressed concern about it. I have done my duty vis-à-visboth entities in terms of letting the House know their expressed views but I do not agree with their views and am happy to accept the five-year provision.

In terms of the triggering of the legislation, I have said there will be a three month lead-in time for the initial part, namely, the change of onus from the insured person to the insurance companies. The latter will be required to ask simpler questions so that people can understand what they are signing up to. I want that to happen within three months of the legislation being enacted. I am suggesting that the industry be given six months after enactment to put the five-year provision in place.We all accept the exclusion of health as we are clear that would become burdensome and could have a significant potential cost for health insurance. That is not what any of us are about. We are all about trying to improve transparency and the consumer protection side of insurance. On too many occasions, if the conflict is between prudential or consumer, prudential wins. On this occasion, I want to make sure it is the consumer who wins.