Amendments Nos. 18, 51 and 55 are related and all may be discussed together.
SECTION 17.
I move amendment No. 18:
In page 22, subsection (4), lines 46, to delete "(in this Act referred to as a ‘non-qualifying member')".
In view of the representations made to me by the Irish League of Credit Unions, I requested that the term "non-qualifying member" be changed. However, the parliamentary draftsman failed to see any value in the recommendation. He pointed out that the term "non-qualifying member" was used in order No. 1,205, of 31 July 1985, under Northern Ireland credit union legislation and could not understand why an organisation with membership on both sides of the Border could not want to use the term. Despite the efforts of my Department to change his mind, he has maintained his position and obtained the support of the Office of the Attorney General. Accordingly, I regret I am not in a position to accept the Deputy's amendments.
I am disappointed with the Minister of State's reply. The term "non-qualifying member" is unfair and should be removed. It creates a second class membership. The Minister of State should recognise family ties. For example, if I worked and lived in Wexford and went to live in Fermoy I might leave my membership in Wexford, given that I may return there, while maintaining a second account in Fermoy. Similarly with a person who moved to another area but whose family has an association with a local credit union. This happens in other businesses, such as banking, and I fail to understand why it must be legislated for. The concept is voluntary, regardless of whether one is a member.
It has always been legislated for in one manner or another. Can the Deputy help me with the objection raised by the parliamentary draftsman? The league is an all Ireland organisation. There are approximately 100 member credit unions in Northern Ireland. The phrase is taken from the legislation which operates in Northern Ireland. The parliamentary draftsman asks how it can be described differently in the Republic of Ireland? While it is not the job of the parliamentary draftsman to be sensitive to internal questions of the league, a legitimate political question has been raised and we have not been able to find a way around it.
Credit union branches are affiliated to the league, not individual members. Each credit union is a body in its own right, with its own membership.
The term under the Northern Ireland legislation is "non-qualifying member".
What is the definition of a "non-qualifying member" under that legislation?
It may be defined as one who ceases to be a member in the fashion described by the Deputy, for example, somebody who moves from Mitchelstown Credit Union to the north side of Dublin because of work considerations but wishes to retain membership of his original union.
The term "non-qualifying member" is unnecessarily restrictive. Is the desire to keep uniformity in the terminology of the Bill between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland the only reason the parliamentary draftsman does not wish to amend the definition? If provisions of the Bill as initially drafted had been enacted they would be at variance with the situation in Northern Ireland. Given this, how can the parliamentary draftsman uphold his argument?
I understand the Minister of State's predicament. Donore Credit Union, Dublin 8, the oldest in the country, is located in the heart of the city. Many people have moved from its catchment area to Tallaght and other areas, yet they continue to relate to the union, the communities and shopping districts of the area. They believe the term "non-qualifying member" is not applicable to them. If people are prepared to travel from Tallaght to Meath Street to shop every week one can understand how they are happy to retain their membership of credit unions in their former localities.
I fail to understand the term, nor do I see the necessity for it. The concept of supporting the people with whom one grew up is very strong in rural Ireland. It is similar to supporting the home club in the GAA. If people wish to support the credit union in which they were involved when growing up they should be allowed to continue to do business with it when they move away from the locality.
Perhaps the Minister of State would convey to the parliamentary draftsman the views of members of the committee on this matter. They do not always get things right in Northern Ireland. We can set our own standards here.
The Minister should consider the issue of family ties, which act as an incentive to people to maintain links with their local credit unions, even when they live and work elsewhere. I may not have worded it correctly but there must be a way round it.
I listened carefully to the Deputies' points and I am sympathetic to the position they describe. There is more mobility in Ireland now than there was in the past and I accept there are ties. However, I sought to address this matter and I gave the committee the response of the parliamentary draftsman. I am prepared to respond to the request to examine it further for Report Stage. I accept Deputy Byrne's point about people involved in the Donore credit union but I hope he has not registered them in his constituency in addition to trying to encourage them to maintain their credit union membership in Donore. I will re-examine the matter for Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 23, subsection (5)(b), lines 7 to 10, to delete from and including "acting" in line 7 down to and including line 10 and substitute "and can give all necessary receipts.".
The amendment is a response to a number of representations I received from credit union interests and others. The point was made that the provision in section 17(5)(b) imposed an unnecessary limitation on the ability of credit unions to operate junior accounts. The provision in the original Bill stipulated that the person under 16 years was required to act through the medium of a parent or guardian.
As far as savings accounts are concerned, I understand it is normal for other financial institutions to allow persons under 16 years to lodge money to their accounts without restriction. As far as withdrawals are concerned, it has been submitted that, as long as funds are available in the account, withdrawals by such persons should be permitted without the consent of a parent or guardian for each transaction. For example, it is increasingly the case that ATM cards are issued by banks and other financial institutions to persons under the age of 16.
I welcome the amendment. Children should be encouraged to start saving at a young age. I understand a savings scheme was pioneered by Mitchelstown credit union, which is a member of the Irish League of Credit Unions. I understand it has 4,000 youth members and the fact that young people have an incentive to save augurs well for the area. This credit union should be congratulated for its initiative in encouraging young people to save. The country would have a viable future if all credit unions offered a similar scheme. Mitchelstown has led the way in this area.
I commend the amendment and congratulate the Minister for taking this point on board. It is a good principle to encourage young people to start saving at an early age by introducing them to the credit unions in their localities. The legislation will be better as a result of this amendment which I support.
The children of Mitchelstown are obviously persons of means.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 17, as amended, agreed to.
Section 18 agreed to.