Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 15 Oct 2002

Vol. 555 No. 2

Private Members' Business. - Insurance Industry: Motion.

Mr. Hogan:

I move:

That Dáil Éireann:

–recognises the crisis in the provision of insurance cover in Ireland and the consequent job loses;

–notes the report of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board, MIAB, published in April 2002;

–expresses alarm at high insurance costs and the imposition they impose on consumers, business and young drivers;

–expresses concern at the lack of competition in the insurance sector;

–notes the role of high legal costs in the high level of insurance costs; and

–recognises an unacceptable level of insurance fraud in Ireland;

condemns the Government for its failure to tackle the crisis and in particular the complete inadequacy of the measures taken to date and calls on the Government to:

–immediately implement the outstanding recommendations of the MIAB report;

–refer the MIAB report to an appropriate Oireachtas committee to carry out an investigation into the findings of the MIAB and to take submissions from interested parties;

–introduce measures to facilitate greater competition in the insurance market in Ireland;

–introduce measures to reduce legal costs in Ireland: and

–introduce reforms to the system of civil litigation in Ireland.

I wish to share my time with Deputies Naughten and Murphy.

An Ceann Comhairle:

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Hogan:

I am glad to have the opportunity in Private Members' time to address this important issue. The report of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board was published in April of this year. The findings of that report brought widespread focus on the insurance sector and the prohibitive cost of insurance faced by business, consumers and young drivers in particular. Such was the level of public concern at the MIAB report that insurance costs became an election issue last May. There were a number of single-issue candidates who ran election campaigns based on reforming the insurance market in Ireland. When candidates run on a particular platform, it involves a serious issue.

Since May, I have heard alarming stories of small and large businesses facing closure or rationalisation as a result of rising employers or public liability insurance costs. Every month, each of us gains first-hand experience of, and exposure to, higher insurance costs, typically in the form of higher motor or house insurance premiums.

We need only look at the figures. Household insurance was up 35% in one year, motor insurance was up 18% in 2001 alone, businesses have experienced a staggering 71% increase in their insurance costs and 20% of companies have reduced their workforce as a result of higher insurance costs. This is a major national concern that requires urgent Government action. It is particularly an issue for young people, companies in the construction sector, the hotel industry and the haulage sector, to mention just a few areas.

Despite the public outcry about insurance costs, this is the first time this House has had a substantive debate on the issue of insurance and the report that was published in May. It is regrettable that this is the case in view of the difficulties experienced by many people. The problem has resulted in job creation in many companies. There have been many studies by consultants and promises of action but few hard measures to tackle the high cost of insurance.

The Tánaiste has rightly been recognised as an active and diligent Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Over the past five years, she has introduced many reforms across all sectors of her brief. The Tánaiste has been seen as reforming, challenging and keen to ensure that the interests of the consumer do not play second fiddle to vested interests content with cartels. Regrettably, on this issue she may have lost some of her reforming spark. She seems content to address the concerns of the MIAB at the speed of a slow bicycle race. Since the report was published, we have seen the introduction of flawed regulations, the establishment of further consultative studies and an unfortunate mix of prevarication and delay. On 18 June 2002, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment told the House that tackling the insurance crisis was her "political priority". The full implementation of the recommendations of the MIAB report, at the earliest possible opportunity, was identified as a key measure to tackle the crisis.

The purpose of this motion is to recognise the crisis in the provision of insurance cover in Ireland and, importantly, to debate the inadequate measures taken by the Government to address the key causes of the difficulties. We need to examine the background to the problems in the insurance sector. The effects of inflated insurance premiums are affecting every sector of Irish life. Motorists are being unfairly discriminated against on the grounds of gender or age. Young people do not have safe and controlled places in which to play, such as skateboard parks, as such facilities cannot be insured. Small companies are making employees redundant, as they cannot afford to pay exorbitant insurance costs while retaining a full complement of staff. Service providers are working without insurance, placing themselves and their employees at risk in many cases. Other businesses are including a surcharge for the expense of their insurance bills when quoting for projects. Banks are now insisting, in many cases, on evidence of insurance cover before giving clearance for overdrafts.

In an ISME survey released last month, 46% of respondents said they were less optimistic about business prospects than 12 months ago. This is an increase of 40% on the response to the same question in the spring of this year. The sales order books of 45% of respondents to the survey are below normal levels for the time of year. One of the reasons given for this is that they are cutting back and reducing costs.

According to another business organisation, IBEC, personal injury compensation now costs more than €2 billion annually. The organisation found in a recent survey that the profitability of 91% of companies had been affected by an increase in insurance premiums. A major impact was recorded in 48% of these cases. The employer and public liability premiums of IBEC's members have doubled, at least, since 2000. The cost of such insurance accounts for more than 5% of the payrolls of small and medium sized enterprises and for about 3% of the payrolls of larger companies. Alarmingly, 60% of companies stated that they had experienced difficulties in obtaining an insurance quotation. The Small Firms Association recently identified insurance costs as one of the major causes of difficulties among small firms. Such costs represent one of the major increases in payroll costs and thereby lead to job losses.

In their pre-budget submissions, the social partners, including the CIF, the Irish Hotels Federation and the Irish Road Haulage Association, will make the case for decisive and early Government action on the issue of reducing the cost of insurance. In an economic downturn, small businesses can help to add buoyancy to the economy. The success of the Irish economy in recent years is partly due to the strength and support of the small business sector. If insurance costs are causing major problems for small businesses, there will be a reduction in their activity. The subsequent reduction in other costs will ultimately lead to a reduction in those companies' labour forces. Small businesses cannot survive with the constraint of high insurance.

Government inaction is at best allowing to continue, and at worse perpetuating, inefficient insurance practices such as excessive legal fees and a dishonest claims culture which is rife in Irish society and which should be tackled. A number of key areas requiring Government action are identified in the MIAB report. There are inefficient practices and a lack of competition in the insurance sector. A number of reinsurers have pulled out of the Irish market in recent years. Seventeen companies were licensed to deal with non-life insurance business some years ago, but now there are only five. This is worrying and will lead to a lack of competition in the marketplace. Companies are allowed to charge what they wish for many sectors of the insurance business. Excessive fees are being charged by professionals in many industries, such as the legal, medical and engineering sectors, and this has to be tackled. The high awards offered by the Judiciary will have to be examined. Society's attitude of accepting or turning a blind eye to fraudulent or exaggerated claims will have to be challenged through new legislation. We will have to make it less attractive for people to risk making unfair claims.

The business sector does not have confidence in the Government's ability to tackle this issue. This results, in part, from the attitude of the former Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Noel Treacy, at the time of the collapse of the Independent Insurance Company last April. A total of €23 million is still owed to Irish businesses that ended up with no insurance, through no fault of their own. Deputy Treacy asked the hotel and construction sectors to provide him with details of the extent of the problems caused by the collapse of Independent Insurance. He promised that their concerns would be brought to Government and suggested that assistance might be considered. Unfortunately, however, nothing has happened.

I know from my contacts with the CIF that it went to a great deal of trouble to put together a dossier to help the Minister of State to bring proposals to Cabinet to resolve this issue which has caused a great deal of hardship to small and medium sized firms. I ask the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to follow up this issue and to prevent a further loss of confidence in the ability of the Government to deal with insurance problems. The Government did not seek to negotiate a settlement following the collapse of an insurance group that had entered the Irish market from the United Kingdom. Independent Insurance had a UK licence and had received a great deal of business that would otherwise have been done by Irish companies. It pulled out of the Irish market without considering the problems of companies who had to forego insurance in the short-term.

The economy will be the first major casualty of the insurance crisis if action is not taken. This problem has been on the horizon for a number of years, but is reaching crisis proportions this year. It is not as if we were not aware of the extent of the problem before Dorothea Dowling's report. The inability of many small firms to pay their insurance costs, or in some cases to receive an insurance quotation, will result in problems in competitiveness on a global scale. This is no longer about a pending crisis, as the crisis is already here. Indigenous businesses will not be able to compete on a European or global stage if the playing field is not level. There has been a reduction in direct labour costs to businesses in recent years, following changes in the tax code, but there has been a massive increase in indirect costs, particularly in insurance, energy and telecommunications.

In the ISME survey I mentioned earlier, insurance costs were the primary concern of 34% of businesses. This highlights the seriousness of the issue and casts doubt on the future prosperity of such businesses. About one in five ISME members has had to let go people. If we translate that, on a conservative basis, to the national level, it can be estimated that between 50,000 and 60,000 jobs could be in trouble because of the crisis in the insurance sector.

Small businesses like Noel Barry Joinery in Cloyne, County Cork, are being hardest hit at present. Mr. Barry searched desperately for insurance for six weeks after discovering that the syndicate that had previously insured his firm had left the Irish market. The company's premium last year was £13,000 and while an unaffordable increase was feared, Mr. Barry had not anticipated non-availability of insurance cover. The company was shocked to find that many insurance companies practically laughed and refused to consider quoting for its business. Only days before the company was due to close its doors, rather than operate without insurance, the Barrys managed to secure insurance for a premium of €35,000. This represented a massive increase on the previous year's figure. Noel and his wife had to decide which two of their four employees to make unemployed, as they could not afford to pay both their insurance premium and the wages of their staff.

One could question why Noel Barry Joinery had such trouble securing insurance. One might imagine that the company had a string of claims against it, or a questionable safety record. Noel Barry Joinery has never had a claim against it. These problems are particularly difficult for the Barrys as they had only recently invested in a state of the art workshop that could facilitate more than ten craftsmen, but which now has only three people working in it. Every week, the company has to raise an extra €525 to cover the cost of insurance, before beginning to consider wages, rent, machinery and other costs. Every new customer is made aware of this additional tax on the Barry's business, and every quotation that is sent out by Noel Barry Joinery has a 10% surcharge to cover insurance costs.

Small companies such as this no longer have the luxury of competitiveness. Today they are only interested in keeping the doors open. Every week there are reports of companies shutting their doors since they can no longer operate within the constraints placed on them by significant insurance costs.

The Tánaiste will be aware of the formation of the Alliance for Insurance Reform, a business group which has been established for the purpose of lobbying on business insurance costs. It reported that in the past month two engineering firms in Cork had put more than 20 employees on protective notice because they could not obtain insurance. They will not go public with this problem. Other examples include a Kildare businessman who builds custom made kitchens and was about to sign a contract for delivery of 168 kitchens for a housing development in Cork but was instead forced to lay off his three employees. His insurance company also exited the market without notice and it was too big a risk to continue with an uninsured project.

A small specialist garden furniture producer in Carlow was offered a contract that would require taking on four more employees, but the project was awarded to a company in another country because Irish producers are considered too high a risk to secure insurance. There is a small country business in the west comprising a forecourt and garage with a tool hire division. The latter provided 40% of the business income and this year no insurance provider would quote the company for this part of the business as it was considered too high a risk.

Jobs are being lost to other countries. One County Monaghan knitwear manufacturer followed a worrying trend when it transferred three quarters of its operation to eastern Europe two years ago. Every job lost becomes an additional burden on the State and every business which closes lessens the resilience of the economy on the global trading stage.

This problem is not only confined to businesses. Inflated insurance costs have further far reaching effects on the quality of life of our people. Children have fewer opportunities to socialise in safe, controlled environments. A skateboarding park in Dublin and an equestrian centre in County Kerry both closed recently because insurance was not available. Westport House in County Mayo and a holiday village in Omeath, County Louth, may not open for the 2003 season. The latter complex has both leisure and hospitality facilities, but insurance cover increased from €62,000 plus €2,500 excess last year to €273,000 plus €6,000 excess this year, an increase of 440%. It is likely the leisure facilities, the most expensive part of the complex, will not be available next year. These are examples from everyday life that all of us come across on a regular basis and demonstrate the urgency required to address the matter.

On Friday, 20 September, the Tánaiste informed the national conference of the Insurance Institute of Ireland that the personal injuries assessment board would be established on an interim basis, pending the introduction of legislation required to put it on a statutory footing. I am surprised this has not been included in the Government's legislative programme for this session despite the Tánaiste's comment that it is a priority. However, she indicated she would bring proposals to Cabinet in the near future. It must be ensured in regard to the PIAB that another expensive layer of costs will not be passed on to policyholders by insurance companies. The PIAB must make a meaningful and real difference to the cost of processing claims, otherwise it should not be established.

The Tánaiste promised to reduce insurance costs, but her colleague, Deputy O'Donoghue, introduced new court limits that might have an adverse effect on insurance costs when he was Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. She also promised us measures to tackle the lack of competition in the insurance sector, but she has had political responsibility for this matter for the past five years. She did not gain responsibility overnight. She has also had responsibility for the approval of mergers and acquisitions since 1997, of which there have been many in the insurance sector.

The MIAB report noted that in 1996 four companies accounted for 50% of the motor insurance market while in 1999 three companies accounted for at least 67% of the market. Did the Tánaiste approve mergers between insurance companies? Did she refer such mergers to the Competition Authority? If the deals were subject to EU approval, did she make concerns known to the Union's competition directorate before such deals were approved? It is important that these questions are answered, particularly in the light of her Department's involvement in a study of competitiveness in the insurance market in conjunction with the Competition Authority.

With due respect to the personnel involved, I am deeply uneasy that the Department has a role in a study of competition in the insurance market. The Competition Authority was established independently and resourced to carry out such studies. Accordingly, the Department should not have a role. It has been suggested that from time to time the Department has suffered regulatory capture by the insurance sector and has taken its eye off the consumer's interest in performing its regulatory duties. I am sure I will be informed differently later. It is perhaps a case of poacher turned gamekeeper, but, increasingly, reinsurers are pulling out of the market while licensed insurance companies which have set up in Ireland with the help of the IDA and the benefit of tax breaks in the IFSC are refusing to trade and compete for business.

What is most alarming about the MIAB report and the Government's reaction to its damning findings is that the current position might suit everybody except policyholders who are expected to fund the existing mess. Many of them earn extremely low incomes and need a car to keep their jobs. Many do not have the money to spare to fund the current inequitable and inefficient system. They believe the insurance sector is rotten and their welfare is the last factor taken into consideration by these large multinational companies. This is the primary complaint of policyholders who have witnessed insurance companies settle iffy claims in the past without consultation. Claimants who have an accident should be involved in the insurer's decision to settle or compromise proceedings arising from it.

The finding in the MIAB report that attracted most attention when it was published was the conclusion that the claims cost of motor insurers in Ireland was among the highest in Europe and that they reported more than 11 times the post-tax profit of their UK counterparts between 1983 and 1999. This finding has conveniently been forgotten and the insurance industry and its representative bodies are happy to move to other issues that may suit their agenda. However, this issue must be tackled and there must be more transparency in regard to the claims cost of insurance companies and the claims reserve declared by them.

A number of years ago the insurance industry lobbied successfully for the abolition of juries in personal injury trials and the removal of the two counsel rule. We were all assured that if these measures were taken, premia would be reduced, but the legal fees remained the same, possibly because the sole senior counsel doubled his or her fee. Within a short number of years, however, the industry was crying out for additional measures which it promised would reduce insurance costs. Insurance broker fees were even reduced by 50% in 1989 on the basis that insurance premia would reduce. I did not question this at the time because I had a vested interest, but I question that measure now.

We need more than lip service to reducing the cost of insurance from these companies. If the Government and Oireachtas of the day are prepared to take measures to reduce insurance costs, we are entitled to ask insurance companies what they are prepared to do to reduce premia. An action plan with a timeframe for implementation is needed and insurance companies must play their part if the Government and the Oireachtas are prepared to do likewise in terms of health and safety, road safety and reducing the legal and professional fees associated with insurance premia.

The legal profession must take a fair share of responsibility for the current crisis. I am disappointed, but not surprised, that the Law Society is unable or unwilling to engage with the MIAB, content instead to sit on the sidelines trying to sabotage the findings of its report. There is no doubt many lawyers have earned considerable sums as a result of a claims culture that has depended more on a weighty tome entitled, The Golden Pages, rather than a distinguished legal text. Policyholders have sometimes been encouraged to take spurious claims that insurance companies were all too ready to settle while ordinary consumers paid for this marriage of convenience between the legal profession and the insurance sector. A self-regulated profession, in tandem with a poorly regulated insurance sector, is squeezing the ordinary policy holder. To many, civil litigation is run for the convenience of lawyers with scant regard for the interests of the public. It is created around a web of mysterious costumes, phrases and fee structures designed to remove the system from the everyday experiences of the people who pay most for its excesses and inequities. The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform should tackle this vested interest and establish a system of civil litigation that pays more attention to the needs of the 21st century rather than the anachronisms of the 18th and 19th centuries.

This will be the true test of the Government's reforming zeal. It is important that the Government response to the insurance crisis is co-ordinated, effective and focused. To give consumers any confidence in her ability to address this crisis, the Minister must publish a specific timetable for the implementation of the outstanding elements of the MIAB report, detailing when each recommendation will be implemented and by whom; expedite the study she has initiated into competition in the insurance sector; remove her Department from that study and make it solely an issue for the Competition Authority; introduce jointly with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform a programme aimed at reducing legal costs in Ireland; and encourage the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Attorney General to introduce urgent reforms to the system of civil litigation.

The insurance crisis would benefit from examination by an Oireachtas committee. All may not be as it appears and the insurance industry, the legal profession and the Department all need to clarify their positions on this question, explain how this situation arose and help resolve all those issues for the benefit of the consumer. A committee is an appropriate means of investigating this matter and could model its work on the DIRT inquiry. In many respects the MIAB report would act as a book of evidence and be the basis on which we could get answers to difficult questions from key players. There is a public demand for such an initiative. Dáil Éireann should be seen to act swiftly.

I hope the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment will introduce these measures as a matter of urgency. She will have the full support of the Fine Gael Party in doing so. By supporting our motion, and taking the steps we have outlined, the Minister can demonstrate her commitment to tackling this crisis. There is no time for any further wishy-washy actions and commitments. I hope the Minister will do this without any further delay or confusion, that she will redeem herself and her Department at this late stage, and get the shine back on her reforming zeal.

Mr. Murphy:

A major issue leading up to the election was insurance for young drivers and it remains a major issue. Young people still cannot get insurance and many people fear the loss of their jobs because many small employers cannot afford employers' liability insurance. Both Government parties were very strong on these issues in their manifestos and in the programme for Government. They knew the crisis was looming but failed to act. It would be reasonable to expect that a pro-enterprise party like the Progressive Democrats would deal with this problem.

The cost of insurance is causing the loss of jobs and is having a major effect on the competitiveness of the economy, something the Progressive Democrats Party and Fianna Fáil talk enough about when wage increases are mentioned. Many companies are now evaluating whether it is worthwhile to continue trading. If current trends continue there will be major job losses. Companies find it impossible to insure drivers who are under 25 years of age, causing problems for those that offer apprenticeships to school leavers. It is also a disaster for those young people who cannot take up an apprenticeship until they can get insurance.

The CIF surveyed its members and found that insurance rates rose by between 40% and 45% in 2001 and are rising at a much higher rate this year. The cost of employers' liability and public liability is particularly high for small companies, shopkeepers, building contractors and pub owners. For those who can afford to stay in business, insurance will add significantly to overheads, adding to inflation and, in turn, to job losses.

It is nearly impossible for small builders to get adequate insurance that will allow them to work for any public body, private person or company grant aided by the State in any way. This will ultimately mean job losses and a severe shortage of contractors who can carry out work legitimately. Work will not be done or it will be done at severely inflated prices because of the lack of competition. It will particularly affect essential repairs grants for the elderly, the disabled persons' grants and the improvement works scheme for councils. It will result in risks being taken by people who find themselves with no other choice if they are to continue to make a living. It is very serious from the contractors' point of view but equally serious from the public's point of view. We are not talking about anything grandiose, but the carpenter and his mate, the plumber, the electrician, the stonemason and the cabinet maker all being prevented from working because of the Government's lack of foresight.

Insurance is now one of the greatest challenges facing community groups as they can no longer afford it. Most club activities will stop in the coming months as a result. Community halls will close. Gymkhanas and pony riding schools have no chance of surviving. Festivals, shows and outdoor events will be at risk. In my constituency a playground in Boherbue has already closed and many more, like Newmarket, will be closed in the near future if Cork County Council cannot take over the insurance.

The impact is particularly harsh in rural areas where there is no alternative to having a car. People must go to work and school but there is no public transport. The farming community is already facing a major crisis over increased costs and declining prices for their produce. Insurance costs are continually adding to this burden.

Does the Government realise the seriousness of the crisis? The problem in the insurance sector will add significantly to the economic crisis we already face. Action is needed now to get immediate results. We cannot spare any time in trying to solve this problem.

Mr. Naughten:

Motor insurance has increased by at least 40% in the current year for commercial motor fleets and by up to 80% for young drivers and haulage firms. A 22 year old named driver with a full licence will see his insurance increase from €500 to €2,000 in the current year. It is common now for young drivers to get quotations of up to €5,000. As Deputy Murphy said, it is not an option for young people in rural areas to have a car; it is a necessity if they want to go to work because there is no public transport. The insurance industry has already told us that similar increases are on the way in the new year.

This issue could be addressed by looking at road safety and the carnage on our roads. What has the Government done on this issue? This year, it has reduced the funding available for road safety initiatives and for the NRA to improve dangerous sections of roads by 20%, a reduction of €3.8 million. The road safety strategy published by the Government in 1998 is now a disaster; it is two years behind schedule. When the new road safety strategy is launched that there will be no timetable for its implementation because the Government has been embarrassed by its failure to meet the timetables set in the current road safety strategy.

The Government's greatest achievement in terms of road safety in the last five years was to ban the use of mobile phones in cars. We all know how that initiative finished up. It was the greatest cock-up in road safety history and the Minister must redraft the legislation after making a joke of the issue.

The National Roads Authority is unaccountable to this House and polices itself in relation to upgrading roads where they cause accidents. The condition of roads is never considered by the NRA to be a contributing factor to an accident, yet many people tell of black spots where there has been a litany of accidents. To further compound matters, the Garda is fighting for road safety with one hand tied behind its back. Traffic units are hampered and using them to generate cash for the State is not addressing road safety. They are treated as a cash cow by the Department of Finance. Traffic accidents cost ten times more than crime each year, but the Garda traffic units are under-resourced and frequently switched to other duties. Too many of the units are working with too few gardaí in old vehicles and without sufficient computer and clerical support which are the key issues in relation to the penalty points system. The Department of Finance consistently failed to provide the Garda and the Department of the Environment and Local Government with the resources to introduce the penalty points system on schedule on 1 January 2000. We await it still, while the Minister proposes to implement an ad hoc proposal which it is doubtful would stand up if challenged in the courts.

We allocate 4% of Garda resources to traffic duties compared to 9% in the UK. Traffic accidents cost the State approximately €700 million annually and there is clear evidence that many people drive unsatisfactorily. The only way to address that is to ensure proper policing to encourage people to abide by the rules of the road. The establishment of a statutory driving instructors register is fundamental to ensure young people are properly trained and have the skills to drive. With the legislation we have in place, I could go out in the morning, put a sign on the roof of my car and become a driving instructor. If the same thing happened in our schools with unqualified teachers training students to sit the leaving certificate examination there would be a public outcry. Yet, we allow young people to sit behind the wheel of a car without providing structure and training for them or the instructors who are supposed to impart driving skills to them. Out of every 20 people who sit the driving test, only nine pass it first time and the result sheet those who fail receive is double Dutch, leaving them with no understanding of why they have not succeeded. Surely, in this day and age we can ensure that a person's failure is explained because they cannot improve unless they know what mistakes they have made.

In their manifestos, the Government parties proposed measures to address this issue which were lifted from the Fine Gael policy document of August 2000 when we appealed to the Government to implement them, though nothing was done. While the Tánaiste has made numerous proposals relating to the personal injuries assessment board, announced two years ago by Deputy Treacy, nothing has happened. In the programme for Government there is a list of things to be tackled in relation to the cost of insurance, but going by the road safety strategy we have looked at today it will be another seven or eight years before any action is taken and the issue of insurance is properly addressed. The Government has talked the talk but has not been prepared to commit to introducing legislation to address the cost of legal fees, bottlenecks in the system and to ensure competition in the marketplace. This evening, the Tánaiste will describe the initiatives she proposes, but the critical issue is when they will be put in place.

Inflation is a huge issue again and one of its implications is for the cost of transport. Haulage firms are being put off the road by the massive insurance costs they face. Some have closed and many have scaled back. There are sectors of the industry which have not seen price increases since the 1970s and to compensate for that they have improved efficiencies by increasing the size of loads and the height of trailers. Last week, the Taoiseach told the House that he is going to ban such high trailers which is his solution to the cock-up we have made in the Dublin Port tunnel. The circumstances elaborated upon in relation to business by Deputy Hogan are arising again and I hope the Tánaiste will set out what she will do over the next couple of months to address the issue.

Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Ms Harney):

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

"recognising:

– that the major determinant of the price of insurance in Ireland is the cost of personal injuries claims;

– the proportion of the cost of claims accounted for by legal and other professional costs; and

– the need to ensure the maximum level of competition in the insurance market;

– commends the action of the Government in undertaking a comprehensive set of measures by a number of Government Departments as contained in the Agreed Programme for Government to bring about a reduction in the cost of insurance;

– recognises the importance of the work done by the Motor Insurance Advisory Board (MIAB), the Group dealing with the implementation of the MIAB recommendations and the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Implementation Group and awaits with interest the imminent publication, subject to Government approval, of the work of the latter two groups;

– notes a decline of over 13% in the number of fatalities and over 40% in the number of serious injuries on the roads between 1997 and 2001;

– commends the Government's proposals for the introduction of a system of penalty points for speeding offences from 31 October;

– commends the increased enforcement of road traffic safety measures; and

– notes the enhanced activities of the Health and Safety Authority and the decline in the frequency of workplace accidents."

To prevent Fine Gael losing the five minutes the party generously gave the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the end of the last debate, I propose to take 25 minutes. I wish to share time with Deputy McGuinness.

I thank the Fine Gael party, Deputy Hogan and his colleagues, for tabling this motion and I accept that we are facing very serious circumstances with regard to the cost and availability of insurance. Like every public representative, I receive a constant stream of representations from individuals and businesses facing huge increases in premiums or, indeed, facing difficulties in getting cover at all. This is happening in all areas of the insurance market, from motor insurance to employer liability to public liability insurance. Increased insurance costs constitute a major threat to the existence of many small and medium sized companies and have serious ramifications for the economy in general. There have already been job losses. A recent ISME insurance survey indicated that 96% of small businesses have experienced an average 71% increase in insurance costs while one in five companies has reduced its workforce, primarily as a result of insurance increases.

An Agreed Programme for Government contains a comprehensive set of actions to address the rate of injuries and deaths on our roads and to tackle the high costs of insurance, particularly motor, personal and employer liability. These include measures to improve road safety and driver behaviour, reduce the legal cost of accident claims and to make the insurance market more consumer friendly. The emphasis is on a co-ordinated set of actions across a range of Departments. We have had excellent analysis of the reasons for our high insurance costs, particularly by the Motor Insurance Advisory Board, and the focus must now be on action. The establishment of a personal injuries assessment board must be accompanied by improvements in court procedures and I welcome the proposals for reform of the Bar Council and the Incorporated Law Society. In particular, I will work closely with the Ministers for Transport and Justice, Equality and Law Reform to ensure that we move forward with a series of co-ordinated moves, our objective being to ensure a fair and efficient compensation system that in no way penalises the victims of accidents. The interim board of the MIAB will enter into constructive discussions with interested parties to achieve this.

I acknowledge the difficulties faced by the insurance industry including the high level of claims and awards, poor returns on investment and difficulties in obtaining reinsurance. The report of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board, published on 17 April last, is the most comprehensive study and analysis of our motor insurance industry ever undertaken and provides a sound basis for addressing the problems we are experiencing in the insurance industry. Its analysis, conclusions and recommendations extend to other areas of liability insurance and it contains 67 recommendations covering a broad spectrum of activities which impact on the market. This was the first Motor Insurance Advisory Board to secure access to insurers' raw data on premium income and claims costs on which detailed analyses are presented in the report. It pulls no punches in contending that vested interests and inefficiencies may collectively account for as much as half the premium paid by the law-abiding motorist. The MIAB further confirmed that the cost of insurance is determined by three main factors, including frequency and severity of accidents, cost of claims within the current compensation system and the operation of the insurance market. These factors have to be tackled to achieve better value for money for policy holders. While there is clearly room for significant improvement in our safety record, there have been improvements in road safety and workplace safety. In addition, the proposals by the Minister for Transport to introduce a penalty points system for speeding offences later this month should further contribute to less carnage on our roads.

The following are some of the major findings in this report. Motor insurance premiums in Ireland comprise 1.6% of GDP. Litigation costs, including legal and expert fees, add 40% to every €1 paid in compensation for injury sustained in motor accidents.Young male drivers aged 17 to 20 years on provisional licences produce substantial insurance losses. They are involved in many accidents resulting in the most serious of claims at a frequency which is disproportionate to their representation as policyholders. Charges for young female policyholders are not justified by their claims costs and these policyholders have been described by insurers as subsidisers.The consequences of uninsured driving are becoming more acute with the Motor Insurance Bureau of Ireland estimating that they add 8% annually to the costs of claims in the aggregate motor insurance market. The market for private motor insurance is not competitive, a situation which is compounded by the fact that motor insurance is compulsory, thereby limiting the usual market forces dictated by consumers. The level of mergers has reduced 17 separate motor insurers in 1993 into just five companies in 2001, some of whom moreover operate under various product images without the identity of the insurer being apparent to our customers. Vested interests and inefficiencies may collectively account for as much as half the premium paid by the law abiding motorist.

The Government decision on the MIAB report provided for the establishment of an implementation group to immediately progress the recommendations and report to Government. The group comprised senior personnel from the responsible Departments and representatives of IBEC, the Consumers' Association of Ireland and the chairperson of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board. The group examined each of the 67 recommendations. Departments submitted individual action plans with related target timeframes that specified the measures needed to give effect to the recommendations.

The resulting action plan will provide a precise road map for implementation of the recommendations contained in the MIAB report. This will include identifying the stakeholder responsible for delivery of each recommendation, a statement of the timeframe for implementation and, most importantly, a projection of the expected impact on claims and premiums. The action plan will be brought to Government by the end of this month and will then be published immediately. The plan will focus on improvements to court procedures, the provision of greater information to the consumer and implementation and enforcement of the Road Traffic Acts. It is my intention to oversee the implementation of the action plan in co-operation with a number of colleagues in Government.

The MIAB was essentially concerned with motor insurance, but the recommendations also relate to other forms of insurance and to the public and employer's liability market in particular. A number of the recommendations of the MIAB report have already being implemented. The motor insurance regulations for 2002 deal with a minimum period of notice for renewing motor insurance policies and the format of the no claims bonus certificate. I will deal later with the joint Competition Authority and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment consultancy study on competition in the insurance market. The Irish Insurance Federation has implemented, or is in the process of implementing through codes of practice, a number of other recommendations. These recommendations relate to such matters as giving reasons in writing for refusing a quotation, recognising the driving experience of retired drivers who have a record on their employers' fleets, rating policies based on accident free driving rather than risks based solely on age and desisting from the practice of requiring collateral insurance business to be placed with the company before supplying a motor quotation. The IIF is also at an advanced stage of negotiations with IBEC on claims settlement guidelines.

One of the major recommendations of the MlAB was for the establishment of a personal injury assessment board. The PIAB will be established on an interim basis pending the enactment of the legislation required to put the board on a statutory footing. I expect to name the members of the interim board within the next month following Government consideration of the report of the implementation group on the PIAB. The board will concentrate on building relationships with interested parties and on establishing the database of court awards in compensation cases and on other preparatory work so that the statutory board can hit the ground running once the legislation is passed.

Establishing the database of court awards in insurance compensation claims will be critical to the work of the statutory board when it becomes operational. The PIAB is not designed to reduce levels of compensation, as has been unhelpfully suggested in some quarters. The board will instead bring about reductions in the cost of delivering compensation. This will reduce insurance costs, while hugely benefiting the policyholder.

In connection with the cost of delivering compensation, I would like to put on record the figures contained in the report of the Motor Insurance Advisory Board. The board found that for motor third party personal injury non-compensation costs as a percentage of compensation costs was 39.5%; non-compensation for employer's liability as a percentage of compensation was 45.9% and for public liability non-compensation as a percentage of compensation was 56.4% in the year 2000. These levels are clearly not sustainable and the objective of the PIAB is to reduce them.

l am concerned about competition in the insurance industry and the Competition Authority and my Department are sponsoring a study to examine the key areas of motor, employer's liability and public liability insurance to see if there are any anti-competitive practices or constraints on competition. Reaction from interested parties is now being sought on the proposed scope of the study, that is, motor insurance, employer's liability and public liability insurance, and the approach to be taken. Following the period of consultation, the terms of reference will be finalised. The scope of the study is being limited to motor, employer's liability and public liability insurance in order to reach useful findings and recommendations on those key areas in a reasonable timescale. However, if consultations reveal particular synergies arising from the inclusion of other non-life insurance, for example, home, commercial property, professional indemnity and personal accident and travel, consideration will be given to the terms of reference. As regards the approach to be taken, issues relating to rivalry between companies and barriers to entry will be examined.

With the establishment of IFSRA we are moving into a new era of financial regulation which will contain an effective mechanism to balance the legitimate concerns of consumers with requirements for effective solvency supervision. Solvency supervision is still important. We do not want a repeat in Ireland of the collapse of Independent Insurance in the United Kingdom. IFSRA will be concerned with both prudential and consumer protection for all financial services. The legislation charges IFSRA as a whole – its board, statutory officers, senior management and job holders – to have regard to consumer issues. The IFSRA statutory consumer director post will be the consumer's financial advocate. The director will be responsible and accountable to the Oireachtas, will prepare a strategic plan and will also be concerned with the education of the consumer. We will also see with the establishment of IFSRA increased dissemination of information of interest to the consumer in making a choice on purchasing insurance products.

The actions I have outlined constitute a comprehensive approach to addressing problems that have developed over the years in the Irish insurance market. I intend to pursue them with vigour and seek a similar commitment from other actors in the market. When addressing the annual conference of the Insurance Institute of Ireland last month, I indicated that we would be expecting reductions in premiums to follow from the Government's comprehensive action programme. The insurance industry's response will be carefully monitored. The acid test will be in the impact felt in the consumer's pocket and on the bottom line of individual enterprises.

Mr. McGuinness:

I welcome the initiatives taken by the Minister in this important area. I commend her for taking an interest in the insurance industry. During the last Dáil the Committee on Enterprise and Small Business did a lot of work in this area. While we engaged with the insurance industry at many meetings during that time, we received little co-operation. The information we got from the industry was often misleading. The committee examined several reports in great detail. The findings of one of these reports almost entirely contradicted those of another, and the information available to the Department at the time contradicted that given to the committee. Looking back, very little was achieved despite the many hours members of the committee spent considering the issue.

As far back as 1977 insurance for young drivers was a significant issue. While the market has changed considerably since then, an examination of the role played by the insurance companies in the investment markets shows no indication that matters are improving. Their market performance shows a marked decline in their return on investments. I have no doubt, therefore, that we will see increased insurance premiums in the next 12 months.

Insurance is the biggest issue threatening growth in the economy. I am aware of companies which have failed to get their insurance renewed. Companies involved in a range of activities, in my constituency and elsewhere in the country, have faced difficulties getting their insurance renewed or have been forced to pay substantial increases in their premiums. To highlight the type of problems companies have experienced with the insurance companies, I will quote from a letter I recently received from a constituent:

My broker invited renewal at a certain premium and I then went round the market to see if I could improve on it. In every case, I was asked who was the holding insurance company. When I asked why they needed to know that, I was told that they could not offer a better quote than the renewal premium offered by the holding insurer, even though they had access to better rates from that office. They would only offer the better rate to someone who was not already insured with the holding office. Further, they all confirmed that if they offered a rate and it later emerged that I was already insured with that office, they would withdraw the offer.

That is the type of activity occurring in the marketplace. On joining the European Economic Community, everyone presumed there would be competition in the insurance market and we would see a levelling out of the insurance premiums being paid. That has not been the case.

In terms of the transport industry – here I declare an interest – insurance premiums have gone through the roof to the extent that a leading national company recently closed its doors after refusing to renew its insurance at the premium on offer and having failed to find another company which would offer it insurance. Transport operators are being attracted to go with a company based in the United Kingdom by an offer of a 7% reduction in premium if they switch. As the company in question will not guarantee that current levels will apply in the years ahead, companies accepting the offer could be left high and dry after two or three years.

Recent increases in the insurance premium for my local authority, Kilkenny County Council, resulted in a dramatic reduction in all council activities, in other words, a massive cut in services. Significant increases in premia for local authorities will have a negative impact on economic development this year and there is every indication that the same will apply next year. We will be in serious difficulty because small businesses have cut back on their activities or staff levels to cope with the increase in their insurance costs. The problem is beginning to impact on every business in the country.

In recent months the Chambers of Commerce of Ireland conducted a survey which indicated that the most significant problem facing small businesses was the fact that they could not determine their insurance premia from year to year. Every day officers at county enterprise board level are dealing with the problems small businesses face as a result of their inability to meet the costs of renewing their insurance. Some operators in the small business sector in my constituency have no insurance cover for their factory because they cannot afford to renew the premium. Faced with the choice of closing up or continuing without insurance, they opted for an extremely dangerous route.

While I welcome the various initiatives taken by the Minister, I remind her that time is pressing. There is no business in the current environment which can continue to develop and retain its workforce in a climate of uncertainty. It is critical that the action taken has an immediate impact on the marketplace. It is also necessary to engage with the insurance companies, which also face difficulties. I do not want the number of companies operating here to decrease again. There are only five real players in the market and it is important that they are kept on board. If possible, the Minister should act to attract other companies to enter the Irish market in order to ensure we have real competition.

The Minister referred to the legal profession. There are problems with the way in which cases proceed through the courts and the legal costs associated with taking claims. It is unfortunate that the high cost of fighting claims through the courts means that the insurance industry finds it preferable to settle claims out of court. Insurance companies openly admit that they do not proceed in many cases despite having an extremely good chance of winning and thus exposing the fraud in our culture which allows people to take such cases. If this issue is not addressed, we have no hope of attracting foreign insurance companies to enter the market. They are all very aware of our legal system.

In addition to the 67 recommendations, which I hope will be considered quickly by all the Departments concerned, it will be necessary to take on the vested interests in the legal profession and deal them a blow which would create a fairer, easier system in which insurance companies will consider it worthwhile to contest claims. If we do not take the full range of measures described and fail to change the system by which claims are processed in the courts, we will continue to struggle and Irish companies will continue to be penalised.

The transport industry is essential for the importation and distribution of goods. In many cases the additional cost of the new insurance premia have not yet impacted on the companies it serves. The increase in insurance premiums, when passed on – the companies concerned have no option other than to do so – impacts on the market. The cost of services increases, the cost of goods being delivered to the marketplace increases and consumers have to pay more for products. We are all aware of the increase in the price of goods here. Insurance costs will add to those prices, causing serious problems for our economy, which faces a challenge over the next year or more. I encourage the Minister to take action in the short-term and, if necessary, to use the committee structure of these Houses to engage with the insurance companies concerned to strike a better bargain for everyone.

Mr. Eamon Ryan:

I wish to share my time with Deputies Crowe, McHugh, Twomey and Harkin.

An Ceann Comhairle:

That is agreed.

Mr. Eamon Ryan:

There is not a person who would not agree with this motion, although I would add to it in two respects. First, while the Motor Insurance Advisory Board's report is welcome, direct and honest, some of its recommendations do not go far enough. I call on the Government to examine other possible solutions to this undoubted crisis. Second, the motion is deficient in that while it condemns the Government for its failure to tackle the crisis, it does not state that it is responsible for the crisis. The issue is that not only did the Government not tackle this crisis, it is part of the cause of it.

I particularly target the Minister's party in being part of the cause of this problem. The complete deregulation or lack of State regulation in this crucial market has led to the current state of affairs. The Progressive Democrats would openly say that they do not believe in regulation of the market. They believe in letting business people at it and that market forces will deliver. That is what has been done in this instance. The various sectors of the market have taken that opportunity, in effect, to increase their profits at the expense of the public and the economy.

Prior to being elected to this House I worked in a small company that traded internationally. Our insurance costs were five or six times those of our competitors in neighbouring countries, which greatly affected our competitiveness. The founder of the Progressive Democrats, Des O'Malley, was active in this area. He opened up advertising for lawyers, which has played a significant role in the way litigation business has developed. One need only open the Yellow Pages and note the 30 to 50 pages of companies advertising for litigation business, one can only guess at what cost, to get a fair indication of what is happening in the litigation business.

Some legal friends have put the case that litigation business has its benefits. It acts as a regulator in ensuring business maintains certain safety regulations or people display caution in various aspects of life due to the legal challenges taken in regard to poor practice or damages, and that is a valid argument. Any reasonable judge having regard to how this area of litigation has developed would agree that this development has gone from a controlling role which the legal profession could beneficially provide to one where the legal profession is mainly concerned about maintaining its profits. It is important the Minister takes on this profession. Tinkering with the system, which is what I believe the Law Society and others are suggesting, is not the way forward.

The Minister very much espouses competition and is trying to break up monopolies and cartels where they exist, but I blame her and her colleagues in the Progressive Democrats for allowing insurance companies to change, under her watch, the nature of the insurance industry. From my experience – I can only speak from that viewpoint as I have not done a scientific analysis of the position – a small number of companies operate in a manner in which there is not free competition or freedom of choice. I found it incredibly difficult to get motor insurance quotations and a number of people have had the same experience. The Minister is responsible for this area and questions must be asked about why that was allowed to happen.

Insurance companies do not have an interest in lowering premiums as long as they maintain their profit margin, which is a matter of concern. Higher premiums do not affect them, they affect their customers. The insurance industry has benefited from rising insurance premiums in recent years. Its concern was to maintain its profit margin, and it did so with a much larger revenue stream.

Another reason for increased insurance costs relates to the medical profession. The Minister needs to be strict and strong in terms of how that profession is brought within the system.

I argue that the Minister should examine options such as the no fault insurance system, which operates in Australia, Canada and other countries. Tinkering with the system will not make the difference that is needed. I favour a no fault insurance system as the way forward.

Mr. Crowe:

There is common ground on this issue in that we all want to see some movement on the problem. I welcome the fact that the Minister talked about taking action on this issue, but the view of the public, particularly young people trying to get car insurance, is that there has been very little action on it. A taxi man told me last night that he was involved in an accident last year through no fault of his and following it was quoted an insurance premium of €11,000, as a result of which he will no longer be able to afford to work as a taxi driver. We have all heard of young people being quoted crazy insurance premiums such as €7,000 to €9,000.

We all welcome the MIAB report and its recommendations, but the public will ask when will its recommendations be implemented. We welcome the fact that the issue of insurance costs is included in the programme for Government. The Minister spoke about the PIAB and about a committee being set up in the next month. That represents some movement in dealing with this issue. A former Minister of State, Deputy Treacy, spoke about setting up such a board a year ago. People want action on this issue because they are being ripped off. The MIAB report clearly states this is the case. We want an impact immediately in terms of addressing this issue. We do not want to talk in terms of another report and some other development down the road.

I am aware of a 46 year old man with a clear driving record who got 17 insurance quotations last year which varied from £480 to £1,158. The premium quoted seems to depend on the mood of the person in the company. If the person concerned has had a bad day, he or she may quote a potential customer a crazy premium.

Many speakers referred to increases in insurance premiums. The reason given for the increases is the number of insurance claims being dealt with in the courts. Others factors include the lack of road safety and unsafe cars on the road. Unlike other countries we issue provisional licences to people who do not have a clue how to drive. It is a crazy system which needs to be addressed. Driving education is included in the school curriculum in the United States and other countries. That is something we may need to consider. There should be a system to support young drivers. For instance, if someone from Tallaght wants to get a job in Intel in Leixlip he or she has no way of getting there other than by using private transport. If one is given a quote of €6,000 to €8,000 for insurance one is discriminated against in that one cannot take up such a job. That is why people are looking for immediate action.

The State should consider setting up its own company. Europe tells us we cannot regulate prices but there is one way of doing so. PMPA was set up years ago because people could not get insurance. This is a way in which the State could help lower prices. There were 17 insurance companies in 1993 and they have been merged into five. This issue needs to be addressed immediately.

Mr. McHugh:

I regard the problems surrounding the insurance industry as among the most critical issues facing our people. The problems are multi-faceted. We have heard about problems relating to motor and business insurance. The MIAB report deals in fair detail with the problems relating to motor insurance. The fieldwork has been done and it is now a matter for the Government to show its commitment to finding solutions by implementing the recommendations of that report.

Very little attention is paid to the problems with business insurance. I am inclined towards the view that the crisis in business insurance is not understood. I know of one instance where a small employer was quoted an insurance premium with a 700% increase on last year. Such an increase is unsustainable. In a case where there has been no claim such an increase is immoral, unacceptable and unjustified. In my view there is collusion within the insurance industry. I request that any investigation carried out by the Minister include the issue of collusion. I say that there is collusion because when that small employer was faced with that increase he sought quotes from other insurance companies, but they refused to offer a quote. That increases my suspicion.

These insurance problems have many knock-on effects such as price increases in goods and services, company closures and job losses. I am not scare-mongering – I speak to people every day and am aware of the problems. I will not list detailed figures or actions that must be carried out. We all know what needs to be done. Many recommendations are contained in the MIAB report and many of them are relevant to the business insurance industry. The Minister and the Minister of State, Deputy Ahern, are aware of the problems. I know they have a commitment – the Minister outlined it this evening. For the good of employers, employees, consumers and the country, speed is of the essence.

Dr. Twomey:

Car insurance and jobs are the obvious losers in this debate but there are other hidden costs to society. There are restricted opening hours in playgrounds because it is not possible to provide constant supervision. There is a decrease in those participating in voluntary work because of the fear of litigation. We are killing the spirit of enterprise because it is so costly to start up a business. Who do we blame? We have a compensation culture that is out of control, professional fees are exorbitant and there is a lack of competition in the marketplace. Other less obvious reasons have been quoted. Drink drivers continue to be involved in a substantial number of road traffic accidents as evidenced in accident and emergency departments in our hospitals. Uninsured drivers are still a significant factor if we are to take court reports as fact. There are health and safety issues at work.

We have only one group to blame if there is a lack of action and legislation in this area – the Members of the Oireachtas. These motions are of little benefit unless they are given substance by having the law changed. Watered down and weak recommendations are useless when we are facing a crisis as serious as that of insurance costs. We need radical and far-reaching changes in the next 12 months. I hope that by 15 October 2003 these will be resolved to the benefit of all our citizens. It is up to us as Deputies, especially those on the Government benches, to make the first move. It is for the Government to resolve this crisis. I supported a recent public meeting that highlighted this issue. The anger from people across a large sector of society was amazing. These meetings will continue in my Wexford constituency.

I am delighted to have been able to make my short maiden speech in Dáil Éireann and to have equal speaking rights with all other Members. The Technical Group hopes to show leadership in the House. It does not consider some of its Members to be more equal than others. Since I am not fully in tune with procedures and protocols, I will not mention the name of a Deputy who was critical of us earlier. It may be a sensitive time for that individual to be talking about change. He will have to get used to the variety of arguments from this side of Dáil Éireann.

Ms Harkin:

Individuals, small family businesses and larger businesses contact my office on a daily basis to express their utter disbelief at the enormous rise in insurance costs, their extreme concern about the survival of their businesses, their inability to obtain insurance cover in the first place and the absolute frustration that young drivers are unable to obtain cover because of excessive costs – that has a particular relevance to rural areas. This is evident not only in my office; the problem is nationwide. Jobs have been lost and continue to be lost. Enterprises, in many cases small enterprises, are quietly shutting their doors. I know of a small enterprise in a newly opened community enterprise centre in my village that had to close its doors because of a 300% rise in insurance costs. The sports and leisure centre in Carrick-on-Shannon has been closed for many weeks, not because it could not pay its insurance premium but because it could not even get a quote. That is a community organisation of volunteers providing sport and leisure facilities who could not continue with their work because they were unable to obtain insurance cover.

I know of businesses that operate without insurance cover or that have only insured part of their enterprise. That is crazy for both the businesses and the public. Despite the ongoing problems, I believe even greater problems are looming. While small operators are going out of business and large companies are letting workers go, all companies are spending excessive amounts of money on insurance premia. This means that next year, when they want to invest in research and development, purchase new premises and employ new staff, they will not have that money to spend. The problems we are experiencing this year will have multiplied by this time next year.

I accept that the Tánaiste does not have a magic wand, but she does have a responsibility to ensure that the crisis in insurance provision in this country is dealt with effectively and speedily.

Debate adjourned.