Report by the Interdepartmental Working Group on Mortgage Arrears: Statements (Resumed)

Deputy Peter Mathews

The expeditious passage of the National Tourism Development Authority (Amendment) Bill by the Minister of State, Deputy Ring, has given me this welcome opportunity to make some observations on the report.

The mortgage arrears problem has been highlighted as perhaps the greatest weight on the people. However, the banks have been slow to admit the scale of the problem. This report does not even address buy-to-let mortgages. Recent commentary by the experts in this field indicates that the provision made by the main banks may fall short of requirements when buy-to-let mortgages are taken into account.

Having made this observation, I will turn to the issue of mortgage arrears that are crushing many mortgage holders, households and families. Two cases as recently as last week come to mind. The debt load on people and businesses — it is not just a question of mortgages — has reached impossible proportions and it is time for the House to get to the core of the problem. If it is underestimated, we will fall short in how we address it.

The combined debt overhanging the economy — households, businesses and the State collectively — is the largest in the world. A report produced by the chief economists of the Bank for International Settlements in late August examined 18 of the developed economies in the OECD, including the world's largest economies, the United States of America, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy and so on, but it did not bring Ireland within its scope. In the table that was the output of the review, it was not surprising that Japan headed the list with the largest combined debt-to-GDP ratio. In this context, "combined" means household debt, including mortgages, credit cards, term loans and so on, non-financial corporate or business debt, including loans, term loans and so on, plus sovereign debt. Japan's combined figure was 454% of GDP, highlighting the fact that, since 1990, it has struggled without gaining economic growth.

Perhaps because of its size, Ireland was not included in the exercise. Having obtained the relevant figures for the economy — household debt, non-financial corporate debt and sovereign or national debt, which is rising as we draw down the troika loans — they came out at 494% of GNP and approximately 440% of GDP. We would have been top of the table.

Discussing the review now is relevant because the findings of those eminent economists explain that, if economies have combined debt-to-GDP ratios that exceed approximately300%, the prospect of growth is eliminated, suffocated or whatever word one prefers to use. Notwithstanding the fact that here and there we see occasional reports of optimistic signs in the figures from the Central Statistics Office and other agencies, we must not lose sight of the fact that the country has a massive debt overload. Households and businesses are trying to deleverage, reduce their debts and correct their balance sheets. It is this imperative that will obstruct opportunities for growth in the economy, as it will reduce the desire to spend and boost or stimulate the economy.

While we are achieving notable successes in adjusting the fiscal imbalance, that is, the overspend compared with the revenue the State earns, we are doing it from an impossible starting point. I am not someone who looks for impossibilities. I look to find realities, in this case what we can do. Having been able to ascertain what I have just explained, I would give every encouragement to the Minister for Finance, the Taoiseach and the rest of the Cabinet to press the case with the European Union, particularly the European Central Bank, on the imperative of achieving a debt write-down in order that we can have a fair starting point.

Of the €110 billion owed to the ECB, €70 billion is due because it advanced emergency liquidity loans to our banks, enabling them to redeem in full senior bondholders up to the end of last year and into the beginning of this year. That was not a good idea, right or proper. The issue of provenance of the loans in the banking system owed to the ECB could not have arisen had a proper assessment of loan losses in the system been conducted. This point must be communicated to Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy. It must be properly explained persistently and consistently. The Minister and his officials are doing their best behind the scenes in the unfolding crisis, but it needs to be said loud and clear within the hearing of the 16 other members of the eurozone. The losses across the members of the eurozone need to be individually and collectively acknowledged and addressed. A sequential examination is taking place, but it is not addressing and combining the contemporaneous problems.

In recent months a book written by John Mauldin and Jonathan Tepper, The End Game: The End of the Debt SuperCycle and How it Changes Everything, explains the debt “SuperCycle” in the world’s developed economies in the past 15 years, particularly in the past decade. It is an important book for anyone to read and it is easy to read. It explains the core origins of the strains being placed on Europe’s national economies.

This is the largest financial crisis Europe and the world have faced and it needs to be addressed robustly, openly and honestly. The speculation is that elements of treaty change may be needed to provide for financial re-engineering and restructuring during the coming months. In fact, it will only be a matter of weeks, as this is a crisis. It is in speculating on what might occur that we must know exactly where we lie and what is possible and impossible to achieve. It is no good having conversations and discussions with eurozone leaders who cannot understand our position unless they have expressly stated writing down and restructuring our obligations and the debt of our banks to the ECB and outstanding bondholders in the large banks will be on the agenda.

With that consideration, the position on promissory notes is part of the discussion. It is imperative the scale of loan write-downs in the banking system be addressed because only then will it be possible to arrange the transfer and the proper and orderly restructuring of household debt obligations to the banks. The Keane report raises the problem for consideration but falls short of what is needed in working out the write-downs necessary. There is no point in trying to postpone or delay the working out the loan indebtedness of households to banks. The loans need to be written down to levels that are recoverable and repayable and that will require large write-downs. It will be done on a bespoke, rather than a blanket, basis. If there is an epidemic in a country, one cannot give antibiotics on a blanket basis; each patient presenting with the disease must be addressed. The same applies in the case of financial repairs.

I urge my colleagues, the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach, to bring this request for recalibration and a loan write-down in the economy to our partners, the leaders of Europe, in order that it can be part of the discussion and the solution to enable our banks to undertake the necessary restructuring of mortgage loan arrears for households and businesses and the buy-to-let sector under the supervision of and with the assistance and encouragement of the Government. A comprehensive solution to this problem must be found.

Deputy Joe Costello

I propose to share my time with Deputy Heather Humphreys.

This is one of the more serious issues facing the citizenry. The number of people with mortgages in arrears was published in Central Bank data recently. Some 100,000 mortgages in the State are in arrears or being restructured. By and large, they are single mortgages. This figure refers to residential mortgages, not those of landlords. Including families makes it clear that there are hundreds of thousands in difficulty paying mortgages for one reason or another. The total amount involved has been estimated at €114 billion, based on the value of the properties, but that is a movable feast, given the figures released today that suggest there has been a 60% reduction in the value of property in the last couple of years.

We are dealing with a human tragedy as well as a financial crisis. People are under so much stress all the time, wondering how they will keep the show on the road, their children in school and food on the table. At the same time they must face an increasing mortgage debt burden. The restructuring that has taken place has been reasonably extensive in dealing with moratoria and bank and mortgage lenders. There has been a certain amount of activity in this regard, including by the expert group which provided the original set of recommendations in 2010 and the proposals made by the Government in the current manifesto. To a considerable extent, there have been attempts to implement them.

The nuclear option of debt forgiveness was not recommended by the original expert group in 2010 or in the Keane report in September this year. That group was a model of efficiency in conducting its work in two months and it came up with some interesting proposals. The basic principle which we all want to see implemented is that no one in possession of a mortgage should have the roof taken from over him or her. In other words, they should be able to hold onto the family home. The number of repossessions has been relatively low. Figures for the last quarter show there were 162 repossessions — in 119 of the cases the property was voluntarily surrendered or abandoned. There were 43 forced repossessions. I am dealing with a number of cases in which repossession has been threatened and in which the sheriff has been contacted. If there were only 43 in the last quarter, the number in my constituency seems to proportionately exceed the amount in others. It is a difficult problem in that all efforts have been exhausted, but there is no adequate mechanism in place to deal with it.

The only mechanism offered in the Keane report is that the mortgage be taken over by an approved housing body. A mortgage-to-rent scheme was put in place. However, it has been the subject of much criticism. It effectively means the approved housing body can take over from the local authority and take a 75% stake, with 25% remaining with the lender. The person in possession, the mortgagee, pays the equivalent of a social rent and remains in the house. However, one element is missing, a mechanism whereby the rent paid is viewed as valued capital as happens in local authorities. In a local authority, after ten years, if one is purchasing a house, a figure of 3% is allocated for each year. There should be an opportunity for the mortgagee to repurchase the house, but such a measure is not included in the Keane report. In that way, someone with an unsustainable mortgage, where the mortgage has been taken over by an approved housing association with the agreement of the lender, could remain with his or her family in the home as tenants. This could be done relatively cheaply because the value of property has decreased so much. He or she would, however, have the opportunity to repurchase when in a position to do so; the equity against the mortgage while paying rent would allow him or her to buy it back. That would be a valuable mechanism for dealing with unsustainable mortgages, a number of which I am dealing with. We need this final safety net to allow people to avoid repossession. We should put it in place as soon as possible.

Deputy Heather Humphreys

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the findings of the Keane report. Mortgage arrears are a serious matter and are affecting people across the country on a daily basis. According to statistics from the Central Bank, around 45,000 households are in arrears for more than 90 days, of which about 32,000 are in arrears for more than 180 days. Those figures give an insight into the scale of the crisis we face. It is easy in the course of a debate for the statistics mentioned to go over our heads without our absorbing their meaning but in this instance we are all aware of the 45,000 household figure. We have all seen the faces of the people behind those figures and encountered the families who are desperately trying to hang on to their homes. We have met those parents who are having sleepless nights because they do not know if they will be able to keep a roof over their children's heads. As Deputy Costello said, this is the human tragedy.

This is an issue that has been brought to the attention of all Deputies in the House. It is not a problem unique to any one area, from Cork to Donegal, or indeed in my constituency, Cavan-Monaghan.

We are all aware of how we came to this juncture. The reckless lending by the banks has been well documented and the purchase of property is now seen as part of the abiding legacy of the bubble. Unfortunately, the lack of supervision and regulation in our banks meant that loans were given to people who should have never have got them.

While it is important we learn from the mistakes of the past to ensure they are not repeated, it is time to move on from analysis of how we got here. It is time to start looking for solutions. The Keane report represents a good starting point. As the Minister has stated, the objective of the Government must be to assist those having genuine difficulties in meeting their mortgage repayments. We all acknowledge the economic climate is unrecognisable from that of just a few short years ago. The aim of this report is to help those who bought their houses at the height of the boom and who have since lost their jobs owing to circumstances completely outside of their control. As a result of a substantial loss of income, they can no longer meet their repayments. There are instances where young couples bought a house, started a family and, subsequently, one or both parents became unemployed or took substantial cuts in wages. That same couple are now in debt, out of work and contending with the many challenges of rearing young children. These are the people who are in real difficulty and who genuinely need help.

We must acknowledge the difference between those who cannot afford to pay their mortgages and those who choose not to pay them. The core objective of Government must be to ensure families are in a position to remain in their homes.

It is clear there is no single remedy that will alleviate the mortgage crisis we face. Instead, the situation must be examined on a case by case basis. Different circumstances apply to different households. A single person in mortgage arrears could have entirely different circumstances from a family in arrears. The Keane report identifies this fact and outlines a number of solutions. Split mortgages would allow those who cannot meet their current commitments to reduce weekly repayments for a period. The trade-down mortgage option would allow families to move from a high value property to a house of lower value when they are unable to meet their current repayments. The aim is to ensure families have a mortgage they can afford. In certain instances, such an approach may be acceptable for the individual but in the case of families, moving home could mean leaving behind friends and neighbours, children having to move school and all the other stresses and challenges moving house can cause. With this in mind, the mortgage to rent scheme could be a positive solution that would allow families to remain in their local community.

It is clear there is no single solution to the mortgage arrears problem. The Keane report is by no means the finished article but it represents a starting point we can build upon. It is important the Government engages with the relevant agencies and groups with a view to building on the findings and recommendations of this report. Groups such as MABS have a long-standing and excellent record of assisting people in difficult financial circumstances. It is important the group's experience and skills are used to good effect when progressing this matter. We must build on MABS's strength and further expand the existing skill set. During my time as a credit union manager, I worked closely with MABS and I have first-hand experience of the great work it does and the respect it enjoys from both clients and creditors.

Deputy Tom Barry

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this matter. It is one of the most serious situations we have faced as a State and how we find a solution to it will define us. Every problem has a solution. People might want to hide away from it but eventually we must face up to it.

I will focus on the split mortgage idea in the Keane report. I welcome the report, whose authors did good work in a short time. Everyone knows 45,000 mortgage holders are in arrears, an increase from 25,000 in 2010. Arrears now account for 6% of the total market and that figure could rise. None of those figures even takes into account the vast numbers of restructured loans, which numbered 60,000 at the start of 2011. Compounding the problem is the interpretation of the Basel agreement currently being applied by the banks. This protocol is used by the banks to issue horrendous letters threatening to withdraw facilities. The implementation of the agreement is left to individual banks, and they are dealing with it by kicking the can down the road either by delaying or disguising the problem, which will eventually make it worse. No action is an action in itself, allowing the market to freewheel with devastating social and financial consequences.

Many Irish people see no light at the end of the tunnel and they are voting with their feet. This wave of emigration is like no other as these people will not be back because all that awaits them is retribution for money owed and unpaid. While many commentators evaluate the situation and highlight the problem, not many solutions have been forthcoming until this analysis by the Keane report.

The need to own one's own home is deep in the Irish psyche. That desire has been ingrained since the Famine, when tenants demanded the three Fs: fair rent, fixity of tenure and free sale. The rush by a new generation to buy a family home was all consuming and, unfortunately, trapped not only this generation of first-time buyers but those who wanted to move upwards and onwards. Each group bought according to their means and disposable income at the time but are now trapped in a financial nightmare.

The split mortgage idea proposes the use of the information from the last banking evaluation, where each mortgage in the State was analysed, along with the knowledge of local and regional bank managers. Preferably, we try to get managers involved in the initial lending of the funds to distressed mortgage holders. As the banks tried to tidy up their books in recent years, they shuffled bank managers around like a deck of cards, thus removing local knowledge from branches and breaking the personal link between manager and customer. This was deliberate and it was done in order that the new bank managers could be a little more assertive and, perhaps, demanding. This needs to be rectified. Banker knowledge of customers needs to be established.

The Keane report, on page 34, expresses worry about the scale of the problem and how we must deal with it. If we got back the original people involved in decisions on most of the distressed loans, we would have a chance of speeding up the redress process. Each mortgage will need to be analysed separately and individually to ascertain the level of repayment the mortgage holder can realistically bear on a capital and interest repayment basis. As an example, let us take a mortgage holder with a €200,000 mortgage. If it is established through the aforedescribed mechanisms that this mortgage holder can pay interest and capital only on €100,000, the €100,000 that cannot be paid must be placed as a charge on the property to be addressed at a later stage, either as a second mortgage or on the sale of the property. The interest element of the charged amount needs to be financed in the interim. This funding needs to be negotiated centrally by the Government at as low an interest rate as possible with the European Union and the IMF because this is a serious issue for Ireland. It is also a possibility that when the banks get back into profit, they could make a contribution towards the funding of the money that must be stacked. We have received no money from them to date and, in fairness, they must start to show a willingness to help.

This is not a new concept as there have been intergenerational loans in the past. An example is the land annuities and land repayments system set up over 65 years ago to allow Irish tenants to gradually claim ownership of their farms. Under that system, special courts were set up to establish land valuations and tenants could pay off the land annuity at any time during the term if their circumstances improved. I have paid off land annuities, as did my father and grandfather. We should not try to solve the mortgage problem in one generation but over a longer period.

The parked percentage mortgage plan, the split mortgage approach, has many positive aspects. It is individually tailored and allows people to pay for their house with no fear of eviction. This is the first priority. It allows the mortgage holder to pursue the objective of owning his or her own home. It prevents a mortgage from becoming a bad debt, thus crystallising the loan and adding to the country's debt crisis. It allows the mortgage holder the possibility of having some disposable income which will help to stimulate the domestic economy. People cannot continue to live in fear of the next letter seeking repayments. The plan will address the considerable fear and anxiety in society on this issue. It may help to avert significant societal problems such as depression and suicide that will arise from the fallout from this crisis. It simply offers light at the end of the tunnel for those who see no way out of the financial mess.

The plan will keep people in Ireland who can help to rebuild our society. Exporting our best and brightest is certainly not the way forward. The plan prevents the sale of properties to venture capitalists and investors who, as the recession starts to recede, might start to raise the rent on these properties, thereby trapping their tenants in an immovable vice once more. This solution does not abolish the debt by debt forgiveness and, therefore, moral hazard is not an issue. The mortgage holder who pays off his or her mortgage on time is rewarded by becoming debt free earlier.

This debt solution prevents banks from off-loading aggressively their distressed mortgages to the State. This would, of course, increase banks' bad debts and only weaken the banks' recovery, placing them in circumstances in which they would be looking to the State for further bailouts. The solution prevents them from becoming demanding landlords, which would cripple sustained recovery. It prevents the transfer of the problem to the local authorities, which would result in their having to bear the cost of rehousing and the massive cost of maintenance. Within the split mortgage mechanism, housing maintenance should not be an issue.

The mechanism prevents banks from standing steadfast behind their implementation of the Basel agreement. They are doing so and will continue to do so if allowed, with such detachment that it is akin to terrorising mortgage holders. They issue letters threatening to revoke facilities and demanding repayments in an unrealistic timeframe. This implementation of the Basel agreement by the banks implies that people will not even have enough money to feed themselves. This is completely unacceptable. A split mortgage plan takes negative equity out of the equation as the debt will be serviced, albeit over a longer timeframe, and the repayments will be adjusted according to individual circumstances.

Strangely, a solution that might have averted the worst excesses of the 1847 Famine, the three Fs, might work in this instance. The first aspect is fair rent. This equates to fair payment, or to what the mortgage holder can realistically pay against the principal sum and interest. The second is fixity of tenure. This is as relevant today as it was 150 years ago because mortgage holders could not be evicted if they followed the schedule. The third is free sale. In this instance, one would be free to sell one's property, by consent, if there was someone willing to take on the existing mortgage.

The proposal forms the basis of a comprehensive plan. While there may be many minor adjustments to be made, the spirit of the proposal needs to remain the same. Interest-only mortgages clearly are one of the factors that created the property boom. They were part of the problem and will not be part of the solution. Banks are moving distressed mortgage holders into interest-only arrangements, which is not a solution. A large number are still heading down the road to default. If successful, the model could also be applied to small businesses. This would increase their cash flow and keep them going. Many small businesses are anchored with property debt because they had a good cash flow during the Celtic tiger years.

The objective of the split mortgage plan is to see all moneys repaid to the banks and the State. The number of evictions and societal breakdown would be reduced. People would enjoy a reasonable standard of living, with disposable income, thus providing a workforce to assist in our badly needed recovery. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, we need to look to experience rather than consult our invention.

Deputy Paul J. Connaughton

The latest figures from the Central Bank of Ireland for mortgage interest arrears make for very pessimistic reading. Circumstances are deteriorating fast and the problem is so vast that it cannot be ignored. I fully understand the concept of moral hazard and the fact that people who did not speculate in the mortgage market do not deserve to be penalised for the debts of others. However, the problem has reached proportions that simply cannot be ignored any more.

The real crux of the crisis is the fact that the current figures are only raising a red flag on the issue. The mortgage interest arrears crisis it is only in its infancy. As many of those in dire financial straits were made redundant since the height of the property boom in 2007, arrears are going to grow exponentially in the coming years. The problem of negative equity is growing. The difficulties will be compounded in 2012 and future years because of the upheaval in international financial markets. It will have a knock-on effect on the availability of credit. Essentially, the days of cheap credit and easy access to credit are gone, not only in Ireland but also across Europe. This will ensure the property market remains in the doldrums and those in negative equity who are willing to trade down will be hampered because willing buyers will not be able to obtain credit. The latter would be unlikely to buy in a market in which prices continued to plummet. This is the perfect storm in financial terms, with international and national economic factors combining in an excruciating way for householders.

There is a danger that debates such as this will descend into a veritable feast of euphemisms, with talk of negative equity, debt ratios, debt solutions and distressed mortgages. It is not distressed mortgages that should be the subject of our focus but the distressed mortgage holder. I refer to the person who has sleepless nights worrying about the security of the family home. I refer also to children growing up in homes filled with tension because mortgage arrears are piling up. In such circumstances, any small instance of over-expenditure or unanticipated cost makes the family budget teeter on the brink or places it in a state of collapse. Thousands upon thousands of households across the country experience considerable angst and tension if there is but one unanticipated bill such as one associated with a visit to an accident and emergency department or car repairs. A high electricity bill also has this effect. I refer not only to the homes of people who depend on social welfare but also to those of people who work daily in low and medium-paid jobs, people whose rates of pay have been cut and people who are working shorter hours or are on a three day week. Such circumstances were never anticipated when they were taking out their mortgages.

Many pensioners are affected. They are struggling to help their adult children through dark financial circumstances. The crisis is taking a considerable physical, emotional, spiritual and financial toll on people across the State. Already, the stress is evidenced by high suicide rates, increased demand on mental health services and the urgent appeal made this week by the good people of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul who are only too well aware of the incomprehensible financial burden placed on many families. The Minister has acknowledged there is no magic solution to this crisis and, in dealing with it, a correct balance must be found between those who cannot pay for their mortgages because of income shocks and those who will not pay. Only 10% to 13% of those in negative equity are also in arrears, which indicates that the problem is caused by income shocks rather than negative equity.

I commend the Minister on the steps he has already taken in regard to forcing banks to deal with people who are facing up to their difficulties, the Taoiseach on his intervention to get the banks to pass on the reductions in interest rates, and the Minister for Justice and Equality on his efforts to update our antiquated bankruptcy laws. I welcome the Keane report and the many good suggestions that have arisen from this debate. I hope the relevant Ministers take account of these suggestions.

If we are to deal with this problem, we will have to consider the consequences of letting the current situation deteriorate, which is inevitable if we do not change course. We cannot stand by and watch as these people crumble under a mountain of debt because the social toll will be too high. Some will ask whether we can afford to address the problem given that the country is effectively bankrupt. I argue that we cannot afford to do otherwise.

Deputy Catherine Byrne

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this debate. As I have only been asked to speak in the last few minutes, I have not prepared speaking notes. However, what is in the head is just as important.

When Dublin Corporation introduced a house purchase grant in 1988, the country went into a frenzy in the belief that everybody needed to buy property and nobody needed to live in rented accommodation any longer. However, the majority of those who live in the 14 different flat complexes in my constituency still cannot afford to buy their homes.

I welcome the Keane report both as a public representative and a parent of young adults who have bought their homes and established their own identities. My mother used to tell us that when we turned 21 we would be given a rucksack and told to make our own lives. This report shows that we care about these people. Even though they may be in debt, they will have an opportunity to stay in their homes. Most young people are not looking for handouts. They simply want an opportunity to live in their own homes while paying for them as best they can. I have dealt with a considerable number of young people who are struggling to repay their mortgages and send their children to school. If they are given this breathing space, they will be able to manage their debts.

The role of this House is to make policies that allow people to return to work and give them opportunities to own their homes so that they can make a future for themselves. As a mother, I often wonder whether my children have enough money to buy a bottle of milk and a sliced pan. These little things in life that we took for granted have become important to people. I have noticed that people are putting fewer groceries in their shopping trolleys when they go to the supermarket at the weekend.

The young people who present to my clinics with mortgage debts do not believe their banks are prepared to listen to them. I was given a copy of a letter which a certain bank sent to a young man with a mortgage. This individual operated a small company that employed eight people but he had to close it because the business went away. When he went into arrears of €2,390.50, the bank started to hound him with demands to make an agreement to pay.

The inner city witnessed an onslaught of apartment construction over the past ten years. No sooner had developers laid the last bricks on the foundations of their apartment blocks than they turned the corner to start new developments. Many of the people who bought in this area want to move on or expand their families but are caught in their apartments. A young couple who were living in an apartment block were interviewed on a recent television programme on the issue of arrears. The couple were anxious to move to a house with a back garden in which their child could play and, most of all, space to expand their family. However, they are caught in a hole which they will not be able to escape for a long time to come.

I have come across a category of people who are in love. Do Deputies recall how we used to know what that meant? These individuals bought properties before they met and now they have to run between their homes to maintain their relationships. They come to me for advice on how they can develop their relationships when they face huge mortgages. The Keane report has nothing to say about this category of people.

I welcome the three alternative solutions that the report offers. The one that jumps off the page for me is the proposal on split mortgages. Most people who present to my clinic simply want breathing space and time to get back on their feet. Please God, the economy will turn around and they will be able to start paying their full mortgages in three or four years time. The report opens up an opportunity for young people and families with young children to step back and come to an arrangement with their banks to remain in their own homes.

Other Deputies have quoted statistics and numbers. I am not great at quoting figures but in the last six months I dealt with more mortgage related problems than in my previous 12 years in politics. If one takes the human aspects into account, most parents would saw off their right arms if they thought it would solve their children's problems. However, what young people need is precisely what is recommended in the Keane report.

The banks still believe they can act as they want. The letter to which I referred earlier leads me to suspect the banks are not listening. The letter states that the bank in question is not obliged to release a mortgage unless its client can repay the loan in full and suggests this may not be possible in the current market. It goes on to state that the bank is not obliged to agree to provide a mortgage loan for this purpose. Every paragraph of the letter is exactly the same. The country and the Government are shoring up these banks. The Minister for Finance and his Cabinet colleagues should ensure that people who want to stay in their own homes can do so. We need to make it very clear to these banks that this is the way to go. They cannot be waving the sword at these people and telling them they will not agree to these terms. There is an opportunity to give young people some breathing space, which is what this report is all about. I welcome the report and I hope many young people get an opportunity to stay in the homes they bought and to rear their children there. This is particularly true in communities where people have bought apartments. Hopefully in the coming months we may do something to help those who are paying huge amounts.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 22 Nov 2011