Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Mar 1997

Vol. 476 No. 1

Credit Union Bill, 1996: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

At the launch of the Bill the Minister of State freely admitted the £20,000 threshold was not sufficient in terms of current building costs. He said "it would not build a decent conservatory nowadays". That observation encapsulates the shortcomings of the legislation.

I represent one of the most urbanised rural constituencies and have been in local and national politics for a number of years. One of my greatest regrets as a local representative is that I did not have the opportunity to organise a housing co-operative which would serve as a model to other areas. The old meitheal principle stood people in good stead when fewer resources were available. Organising a housing co-operative in a rural parish would help to regenerate a local population which may be drifting to large urban centres. The credit union movement would be an ideal source of finance to provide such a structure. However, the lending threshold of £20,000 will effectively prohibit such involvement, given building costs.

The Minister of State and other advocates of the legislation and the restrictions therein could not argue against the idea of the credit union movement participating in house building in rural areas where people have limited resources. The Minister of State should consider that example.

What level does the Deputy recommend?

The movement made recommendations in its submission. I do not know if the thresholds it suggests are adequate. It suggests £30,000 or a percentage, depending on the capacity of the credit union to advance a loan. I am not being critical, but I would like the Minister of State to contemplate a scenario where a group wishes to organise a housing co-operative in a rural parish. Given the credit union movement's community focus, it should have a pivotal role in organising such activity. It should also have an important role in setting up enterprise centres in small towns. The threshold, however, effectively prohibits the movement's participation. I am sure there are other examples which do not spring to mind in which the movement should be able to become involved. No legitimate argument has been made by the Minister of State's side of the House against this concept.

In a response to a parliamentary question tabled by Deputy Sargent and supplementary questions asked by other Members, the Minister of State indicated that wide-ranging consultations took place with credit unions and that he attended meetings and made officials available for consultation. If, after all that consultation, it is necessary for the Irish League of Credit Unions to submit 77 amendments for the Minister of State and his officials to consider, it reflects a high level of dissatisfaction with the Bill's provisions.

As a public representative, I received a considerable number of representations from credit union members and those involved in the running and organisation of them at local level. The misgivings they expressed and the submission of 77 amendments mean that there will have to be a significant rethink of the Bill if it is to meet the needs and requirements of those concerned. As a Member said, this Bill has been in gestation for some time.

Are there other interests involved who believe there may be an overlap or an infringement of their area? The Minister of State, in a reply to a parliamentary question by Deputy Ned O'Keeffe, referred to correspondence with the banks on the matter. Given the Bill's provisions, the banks and other financial institutions have nothing to worry about.

This is an ideal opportunity to build on community structures so that people may do things which gain little recognition in the administrative or political arena. Given this opportunity to introduce beneficial legislation, we should take account of any misgivings the movement advances. I have no reason to doubt that consultation took place, but there is a serious problem with the legislation.

During the run-up to the last general election it seemed imperative that we establish a third banking force, but calls for it are not as strong today as in 1992. The principal advocate of the third banking force was the Labour Party. I do not know if Democrat Left felt as strongly but I am sure it was on the same wavelength. This legislation provided an opportunity to introduce competition but it has been fudged. I have no doubt the Minister of State is committed to the concept of community development and to building worthwhile structures in Tallaght, Clondalkin or Muirhevna Mor in Dundalk. I was glad to hear him say in response to a parliamentary question tabled by Deputy Ned O'Keeffe that he will bring forward worthwhile amendments on Committee Stage. I hope when he responds to Second Stage, he will avail of the opportunity to outline his thoughts. If the amendments tabled do not deal with the major amendment requirements, it will be a pointless exercise. The borrowing and savings thresholds caused the most concern and if these concerns are not addressed, the Bill will be ineffective.

In families with limited incomes there is a need for discipline and routine in the organisation of family finances. The credit union movement has fulfilled a tremendous role in that regard. The head of the household will often go to the local credit union to lodge money with the intention of raising a loan at a later date for educational purposes or to build an extension or buy furniture. Apart from their mortgage company, they have had few dealings with commercial financial institutions. The credit unions, which are community-based organisations, are consumer friendly. The same cannot be said for commercial financial institutions. When the Irish League of Credit Unions states the Minister of State should go back to the drawing board, we should sit up and take notice.

A number of Deputies have referred to the scourge of moneylending. Many households can find themselves in appalling circumstances when they become involved out of necessity with moneylenders. I am sure responsible public representatives will channel any person experiencing problems with money lenders in the direction of the credit union movement, which may be in a position to help.

With the passage of time people's needs and requirements change. There should be sufficient flexibility to ensure the credit union movement does not stagnate but continues to grow and develop.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this important financial Bill. It is major legislation and ranks in importance alongside the Child Care Act, with which I was involved for a period of over 12 months and which was considered to be progressive social legislation. I hope this Bill will be viewed in the same way.

The credit unions, which are to be found worldwide, have served their members exceedingly well for half a century and are an important source of financial support. In recent years there has been much talk about the need for local initiatives and to adopt a bottom-up or self-help approach. The group water schemes provide a perfect example. Their members pledge to provide the necessary capital and put the organisational structures in place in the provision of vital infrastructure with State support.

The credit union movement is based on the same concept of local community involvement and management. They have the necessary personal knowledge of and confidence in their members and shareholders which is vital in making decisions in their favour. They are more approachable and accessible than the commercial financial institutions, which, with the aid of modern technology, transmit decisions quickly. Bank managers have had many of their discretionary powers taken from them and tend to be dictated to from high. They have to operate within strict parameters determined at national headquarters and regional level. The only obstacle in the way of credit unions is the legislation under which they have to operate.

Before I entered politics I was involved in the financial services sector and, therefore, have a reasonable knowledge of the industry. Credit unions give those who do not qualify for a credit rating or financial assistance from commercial financial institutions another option to purchase a motor car, tractor or furniture or to build an extension.

As the economy continues to expand, the credit unions are demanding they be allowed compete on a level playing pitch. They are in a position similar to that in which the Trustee Savings Bank found itself. I had the privilege of steering legislation through the House to allow it compete on a level playing pitch with the associated banks and other financial institutions.

The credit unions, which are owned by their members and shareholders, are run by supervisory, credit and management committees with the assistance of extremely dedicated professional staff. They deal with their clientele, investors and shareholders and those who require assistance on a personal and humane basis. The commercial financial institutions, on the other hand, look at one's account balance and take one's credit record into account. Where they are not prepared to fund small industry, the credit unions are often willing to step in and provide the necessary financial support. Their track record allowed them, after five years or less, to go to a financial institution for a loan to expand their business, create jobs and deliver economic growth to local communities in rural Ireland.

The credit union has played a key role. It is not only a financial and humane institution but also a major positive organisation. Apart from its financial work, it acknowledges community development, local organisations, schools and communities. It sponsors many initiatives vital to creating economic activity and community development. Its projects are imaginative and it creates opportunities for young people. It is open, accessible and positive unlike other financial institutions which, unless there is a major commercial opportunity, are reluctant to loan money in small communities but are prepared to spend huge amounts on a regional, city, urban or national basis because the return, according to their market research, will be greater. They do not have much interest in local communities and the average donation from a bank to a local effort is £25. The credit union does much more than that on a local basis by promoting the community and recognising their local membership. Its contribution to economic and industrial development is vital.

The Bill has been such a long time in gestation, I would have thought that, by the time it was published, it would satisfy the demands of the movement and that it would put the performance of credit unions on an equal footing vis-à-vis other financial institutions. There are over 400 credit unions in the country with huge resources, some of which hold deposits of only £500,000 in the case of small rural communities and up to £55 million in huge urban areas of high population density. Unions and civil and public service organisations have their own credit union movement with the facility of making automatic weekly deductions to create deposits and shares which are managed for the benefit of members. This gives them a huge advantage over people in rural Ireland who, in many cases, are ordinary individuals in need of money or have money to invest and are prepared to do so locally. They benefit from it by investing with their credit union.

In many small provincial towns, the credit union movement has made a major statement about its activities and confidence in local communities. It has invested wisely and acquired properties in key locations. It has either built new facilities or acquired existing buildings and converted them into local, modern, financial services centres. It behoves us as legislators to ensure we provide clear, simple, positive and protective legislation which allows the credit union movement to grow, prosper and confer facilities and services on its members similar to those of other commercial institutions. The latter lend money, to the benefit of their directors and investors, institutional or otherwise, whereas the credit union movement confers benefits on its shareholders and members as a non-profit-making operation. The credit union movement's tremendoes fixed assets in property in key locations in our communities are a statement that this country has made major progress and that the movement can now use its expertise and knowledge to expand its services and facilities to the benefit of local people. I hope this legislation will not impose further impediments on the movement.

When this Bill was published, we were told that there would be no difficulty with it and that it would be supported by the movement. From my consultation with members of credit unions, I know they are not happy with the restrictions being imposed. I had meetings with members of various credit unions, as did my political colleagues. They told us what they felt was being proposed in the Bill from their consultations with Department of Enterprise and Employment officials and with the Minister. I advised at those meetings that capping loans at £20,000 was ridiculous. We have been waiting a long time for legislation and it should take account of past performances, give the credit union movement confidence to expand, develop and deliver its services, utilise its resources, make a greater contribution to economic activity, sustain low interest rates and compete equitably and fairly with other financial institutions and ensure that credit union members prosper together with the country, the movement and other financial institutions. I am not convinced from my examination of the Bill and the accompanying memoranda and documentation and from what I have heard from the Minister and the movement that this situation will prevail.

I read the interview which the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, gave to Review, the bimonthly magazine published by the Irish League of Credit Unions. He said he would listen to the credit union movement.

I have been listening. This is my fifth day of listening.

I did not say the Minister of State was not listening. I hope he will listen again to the elected representatives of the people who are part of this movement. His Department must be advising him and he must understand that capping loans at £20,000 is lunacy and that a five year lending period is silly.

I was involved with building societies. Long before the economic developments of today and long before the level playing field, there was only one group of institutions which took account of individual citizens, their capacity to repay and family situation and allowed them to rear their family and have a reasonable standard of living over a period of time based on their age, and that was the building societies. They have always been prepared to give long-term mortgages, so vital in easing repayments, to ensure people could make a commitment to themselves rather than being dependent on the State.

There is no point in curtailing the credit union movement in what it seeks to deliver. The movement has a key role to play and there is a major opportunity for it to expand. As a member of the Government, the Minister of State has an opportunity to allow the movement expand. A Minister of State seldom has an opportunity to introduce such vital legislation. The Minister of State said he was prepared to listen and must listen to the views of Members of this House. He must be prepared to accept amendments and have an open view and a clear vision of what is in the best interests of the future of our country vis-à-vis the credit union movement and financial management.

As we move into the next millennium, the minimum lending capacity of the movement should be £50,000. There is no point talking about a smaller figure, but certain criteria could be laid down. There must be consultation with the Central Bank, the Department of Finance and others. Why was the introduction of this legislation delayed for so long? Why are the restrictions in it so severe? Somebody did not favour it and suggested strict legislative proposals that appear to curtail the ability of the movement in what it seeks to deliver to its members. It may have been someone in the Department of Finance. I doubt if it is someone in the Minister of State's Department or in the Central Bank. It may have been business people in competing financial institutions. The International Financial Services Centre is a major success story. There is great competition between the financial institutions and economic growth is at its highest in our history. There is an opportunity to confer on another financial institution a system of financial management with benefits similar to those that apply to other institutions that will allow the movement to provide what it seeks to deliver.

The minimum lending figure for the movement should be £50,000. A minimum lending figure of £20,000 is crazy. Farmers do not have the wherewithal to buy a new tractor which costs £50,000. A second-hand one costs £20,000. Farmers have an account with the local creamery to which they sell milk, with the local mart to which they sell livestock and an arrangement with their local credit union to lodge their monthly milk cheque and so on. It is important to keep business local to sustain the local community, whether in small towns taking account of the needs of small business or in rural towns which are so dependent on the local infrastructure and the demographics vital to sustain the local community. If services are not provided locally to meet people's needs, the rural area will be denuded.

The credit union movement is broadly based and has played a key role in rural and urban Ireland. It has provided an excellent service to people who had to deal with tragic deaths and personal harassment from vicious moneylenders who charge compound interest rates. I pay tribute to my former ministerial colleague, Deputy Woods, for his work in organising the involvement of the credit union movement to address those problems. The Minister for Social Welfare and others have expanded on that to help people address their major financial problems.

Our people are our greatest assets. The credit union movement is the only organisation that has taken account of people's problems and provides facilities to address them. It takes account of people's income and whether they are employed or unemployed. Most other financial institutions will not grant loans and other facilities to the unemployed. The credit union movement does not operate on that basis. It has local knowledge and a human connection that is vital to delivering a proper service to its members.

It is vital the Minister amends section 35 and the maximum loan facility is made available. Some speakers suggested the limits applying to credit unions should be staggered depending on the location of the credit union and the size of its deposits. That would be disastrous.

The only thing staggering here is me. If the Deputy does not stop, I will not be able to stagger out of the House.

Anthony Hopkins got an Oscar for Silence of the Lambs. Some people say the Minister, Deputy Higgins, is consulting him to see if the Minister of State should get an award for “silence of the rabbits”. I am not so sure he should. The Minister of State does not stagger when it comes to dealing with some matters.

Section 35 should be amended. Irrespective of what deposits a credit union has, there should be no discrimination against any branch in terms of the limits that apply to it. A facility in law that is available to one branch should be available to all branches. People want to live in parts of rural Ireland that have major attractions and others wish to provide facilities in those areas. The same facilities should be available in a credit union in Donegal or Connemara as are available in a branch in Dublin 4, 8 or 10.

I thank the Minister for introducing the Bill. I am not satisfied there is clarity in it. I cannot understand why anyone would put impediments in the way of the development of the movement. I have the utmost confidence in the Minister to bring his Government colleagues on side to ensure that the parties making up the Government listen to the two Opposition parties and the Independents who want to ensure this is a positive and practical Bill. We will give the Minister of State every co-operation to help him achieve that, but he must listen and co-operate with us. If he does that, he will be remembered as a Minister who introduced a very important financial instrument for the future development of our nation.

I, like other speakers, could speak for hours on this historic and important legislation. I am a member of the smallest party in the three party coalition Government and I am proud of the phenomenal influence my party has had in Government. I am also proud of the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, who introduced this Bill after a lapse of 33 years since the last legislation on this area was introduced. I have no doubt he will be famous not only for tackling the publicans who had the audacity to increase the price of the pint on at least two occasions before and after Christmas, but for introducing this magnificent legislation. I am sure he is listening to our views. I was delighted to hear the previous speaker applaud him for his ability to listen and to act. He also paid the Minister of State a compliment by saying he had every confidence in him. I also have confidence in him.

The Minister of State and other Members know I am a grassroots politician and work closely with my constituents in the predominantly working class Dublin South Central area. I know a great number of them are involved in and have great praise for the credit union movement. There are at least ten credit unions in my constituency. I applaud the staff of the credit union movement and the community activists who have provided a service for large numbers of decent working class families on low incomes who cannot borrow the amount of money they need from the high street banking institutions.

Excellent efforts were made by the staff of Walkinstown credit union to acquire old shops owned or leased by Dublin Corporation to build a magnificent new office. They, as well as the staff who work from premises in Galteemore Road in Drimnagh, should be applauded. The Minister should take a trip there. No sophisticated existing banking system compares with this magnificent project, the official opening of which I attended. The staff are impeccably presented in beautiful uniforms. The building is of an extremely high quality with a marble facade. The architecture is excellent and good materials have been put into the building.

We should applaud the fact that the Lord Mayor of Dublin, Councillor Lynch, is an extremely active member of Donore Avenue credit union. Without the credit union movement, the funds which many of my constituents have availed of would never have been accessible. It is important to remember the thousands of people who followed Ireland in the World Cup tournament and whose trips to Italy were financed by the credit unions.

Credit unions often help those on low incomes who wish to instal replacement windows or doors, modernise their kitchens and carry out other household improvements. Very few people living in poor circumstances could access funding for an annual holiday to Spain or Portugal to break the monotony, without borrowing from credit unions. The credit union movement has achieved all of this. I applaud the Minister and the credit union movement.

Nobody underestimates the significant role of the credit union movement in this country. This is a tortuous and complex Bill which has wound its way through the parliamentary process for a couple of years. I hope the Minister will take the points raised on this side of the House into account. Tonight, in the Green Isle Hotel in his and my constituency, the local credit union chapter is meeting. The Minister has met with the national credit union movement. He has also outlined his visit to a conference in Limerick, its professional presentation and the valid concerns expressed.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share