I move the Second Reading of the Moneylenders Bill. It has been through the House in the last Dáil and amended after evidence being taken from the moneylenders themselves, from Government officials, and with the co-operation of the whole House. The Bill, therefore, through the evidence which appeared in the Press at the time, is familiar in its principle to everybody. Everyone realises the necessity for it, therefore, and it would be waste of time to go over it again. The only point I want to draw attention to is the amended rate of interest. In the Bill as introduced it was 20 per cent. After careful consideration, that has been changed to 39 per cent., because we found that the usual rate varied from 150 to 200 per cent. at present and, in England, where the standard rate was fixed at 48 per cent. a great many of the moneylenders who were producing the worst effect of the moneylending business were wiped out by reducing the rate to 48 per cent. We felt, therefore, that 39 per cent. as a maximum fixed rate would be the best thing to introduce into the Bill here. In the Bill, as originally drafted, the principle was that the 20 per cent. should be a standard but should not be a maximum. We think it is better to fix a maximum and to make that maximum 39 per cent. The reason that figure is chosen is because it is easily dealt with in connection with weekly payments. It is a Committee recommendation and the amendments are all of necessity Committee recommendations.
The issue that was exercising the minds of a great many people on the Committee was whether we should arrange the Bill so as to wipe moneylenders out altogether, but we came to the conclusion that it was better to take the other course for the reason that prohibition generally has the effect of driving people underground. It is better to have it controllable, even though it is recognised as an evil—and I am afraid, a necessary evil—than to drive it underground and so prevent the possibility of supervision. In such a case there would be no protection for people in desperate straits, and we think it is better to give them whatever protection we can by allowing moneylenders to become registered. Another point is that in Ireland we have no charitable institutions such as they have in other countries like Italy, for helping people out of their difficulties. Until we have such we would not be justified in wiping out the moneylenders entirely, but we are placing them in the position of carrying out a very excellent function for society, if they wish to do so, by helping people in great necessity out of their difficulties, and, at the same time, not encouraging people who want to get a large loan for betting purposes and who do not care what interest they pay. When this Bill is passed, we hope it will facilitate the Administration in following up moneylenders who do not intend to get registered. It is difficult for the police to deal with the matter, but we hope that the effect of this Bill, which is now in a form which is largely the result of police investigation and the evidence of District Justices, will be to help them considerably. I anticipate, therefore, that there will be no difficulty in getting the Bill through all its stages, but, being a Private Bill, it would require to be sent to a Special Committee and it would take about a fortnight to deal with it passing through Committee.