Thursday, 26 Nov 2020

Written Answers Nos. 106-120

Covid-19 Pandemic

Questions (107)

Jim O'Callaghan

Question:

107. Deputy Jim O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Finance the likely impact of the move to level 5 restrictions on tax receipts for the rest of 2020. [39186/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

My Department has estimated a cost of €1.5 billion to the Exchequer as a result of the level 5 restrictions. The estimated cost arises from both an increase in public expenditure and a decline in tax receipts. There is a considerable amount of uncertainty in relation to this estimate, depending on, inter alia, individual take-up, firm-level decisions and sector specific impacts.

Reflecting a steep fall in personal consumption, the previous period of the most stringent restrictions led to a significant decline in VAT and Excise duties. I expect the same will happen in respect to the latest restrictions, although some of the high frequency data published by the Department show the impact is likely to be less severe than in the spring.

A further consideration is the operation of the Covid Restrictions Support Scheme (CRSS). In the past two months, tax receipts have been withheld by the Revenue Commissioners in order to facilitate payments under the scheme, which was announced by the Government in Budget 2021 to provide support to businesses that are affected by the restrictions. As such, the CRSS 'artificially' dampens tax receipts.

VAT is the primary channel through which the impact of level 5 will be felt on tax receipts. As it is paid with a two-month lag, the likely impact will not be known until January receipts are collected.

I will publish the taxation receipts for the fourth quarter early in the new year.

Covid-19 Pandemic Supports

Questions (108, 138, 193, 200)

Aindrias Moynihan

Question:

108. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Minister for Finance the consideration being given to extending the spend and stay scheme, given that with level 5 restrictions individuals are not able to avail of this scheme currently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39120/20]

Christopher O'Sullivan

Question:

138. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Finance his plans to review the stay and spend scheme in view of the current level 5 restrictions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39192/20]

Paul McAuliffe

Question:

193. Deputy Paul McAuliffe asked the Minister for Finance his plans for amendments to the spend and save scheme in view of the current level 3 status of the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29974/20]

Imelda Munster

Question:

200. Deputy Imelda Munster asked the Minister for Finance his plans to amend the qualifying criteria for the stay and spend scheme; if non-taxpayers that have been excluded can be included in the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28044/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

I propose to take Questions Nos. 108, 138, 193 and 200 together.

The purpose of the Stay and Spend scheme is to provide targeted support to businesses within the hospitality sector whose operations are likely to be most affected by continued restrictions.

Stay and Spend provides tax relief by means of a tax credit at the rate of 20% on qualifying expenditure of up to €625 per person, or €1,250 for a jointly assessed couple. It commenced on 1 October 2020. The tax credit is worth a maximum of €125, or €250 for a jointly assessed couple.

The scheme is due to operate until 30 April next year but the flexibility exists for me to extend its operation in 2021 beyond that date. However, it is too early as yet to take any decisions in that regard. Much will depend on how matters unfold in the weeks and months ahead. As I have said previously, I will be monitoring the scheme, to see how it’s working and if any changes need to be made. We need to keep policies that are working, and change ones that might not be working as planned, but at all times, ensuring they are affordable.

In relation to non-taxpayers or those who may not have a sufficient tax liability to avail of the scheme, within the tax system, the normal position is that a tax credit can only benefit a person who has an income tax liability. For the Stay and Spend scheme, however, special arrangements have been made to extend the potential benefit as widely as possible so that, even where a person does not have an income tax liability, he or she may still benefit by virtue of having a USC liability. There are no plans to further broaden out the scheme in this regard.

It is important also to recall that the scheme should not be viewed in isolation from the other measures put in place to support businesses generally and the hospitality sector in particular. The VAT change; the rates waiver; the extension of the wage support scheme until next year and its extension to new or seasonal staff; and other Government measures all play a part in helping the sector cope with the challenges it faces.

Value Added Tax

Questions (109)

Cathal Crowe

Question:

109. Deputy Cathal Crowe asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider a proposal to abolish VAT on condoms. [39121/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

The VAT rating of goods and services is subject to the requirements of the EU VAT Directive, with which Irish VAT law must comply. The EU VAT Directive does not allow for a zero rate of VAT to be applied to condoms.

Banking Sector

Questions (110)

Michael Creed

Question:

110. Deputy Michael Creed asked the Minister for Finance his plans to tackle lack of competition in the banking and mortgage markets in view of the Central Bank’s retail interest rates for August 2020, which show a big differential between interest rates here and the average EU interest rates; the contact he has had with a bank (details supplied) regarding its continued involvement in the banking market here; and the way in which the State can leverage its shareholding in the banking sector here to maximise competition. [30692/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

I am conscious of the fact that the general level of lending interest rates in Ireland are higher than is the case in many other European countries, though it should also be noted that recent trends indicate that rates have been falling. For example, interest rates on new fixed rate mortgages (excluding renegotiations) have fallen from 4.11% in December 2014 to 2.64% in September of this year.

However, when the full context is considered, it should be noted that Irish loans, particularly Irish mortgages, can have different characteristics from those offered by other EU banks making direct comparison of these rates inconsistent. For example, many Irish banks include incentives such as cash back offers, which reduce the effective Irish mortgage interest rate. Irish mortgages are also not subject to upfront fees typically charged by banks in other EU jurisdictions, and which can result in lower headline rates elsewhere in the EU.

Nevertheless, there are a number of important factors which determine the interest rates charged on Irish mortgages. These include operational costs, certain structural factors as referenced above (such as incentives offered), as well as the fact that pricing will reflect:

- credit risk and capital requirements which in Ireland are elevated due to historical loss experience;

- the level of non-performing loans which is higher in Ireland relative to other European banks (as provisioning and capital requirements are higher for these loans to reflect their higher risk and this in turn results in higher credit and capital costs for the Irish banks);

- there are lower levels of competition in the Irish banking market compared to other jurisdictions (however, it is noted that a new entrant has recently entered the residential mortgage market and that it is offering fixed rate mortgages at competitive interest rates).

However, the Central Bank has a range of particular measures to protect consumers who are taking out a residential mortgage. The consumer protection framework requires lenders to be transparent and fair in all their dealings with borrowers and that borrowers are protected from the beginning to the end of the mortgage life cycle; through protections at the initial marketing/advertising stage, in assessing the affordability and suitability of the mortgage and at a time when borrowers may find themselves in financial difficulties. In particular, the Central Bank introduced of a number of increased protections for variable rate mortgage holders which came into effect in February 2017. The enhanced measures, which are provided for in an Addendum to the Consumer Protection Code 2012, require lenders to explain to borrowers how their variable interest rates have been set, including in the event of an increase. The measures also improve the level of information required to be provided to borrowers on variable rates about other mortgage products their lender provides which could provide savings for the borrower and signpost the borrower to the CCPC’s mortgage switching tool.

The Central Bank also introduced additional changes to the Consumer Protection Code in January 2019 to help consumers make savings on their mortgage repayments, provide additional protections to consumers who are eligible to switch, and facilitate mortgage switching through enhancing the transparency of the mortgage framework.

Ultimately, however, the price lenders charge for their loans is a commercial matter for individual lenders. Nevertheless, I will continue to work with the Central Bank and also engage with lenders to encourage, within a framework which seeks to maintain overall financial stability, greater price and other competition in the mortgage market, both for new and existing borrowers. As noted above, it is, therefore, a welcome development that a new residential mortgage lender has recently entered the market and it will be of benefit to new mortgage borrowers and also to borrowers, in particular to borrowers who may still on a standard variable rate with the lender, who may wish to consider switching to a new lender.

Regarding Ulster Bank and its continued involvement in the Irish banking market, I met with representatives of Ulster Bank on the 21st of October. I outlined that I expected that staff, customers and other stakeholders would be informed promptly about any decisions being made. I also emphasised the importance of Ulster Bank to the Irish financial services market, to the wider economy and to the communities it serves.

In response, Ulster Bank confirmed that the strategic review is ongoing and that no decision has yet been taken. Ulster Bank also confirmed that there is no set timetable for this review and that it is fully aware of the strategically important role that Ulster Bank plays in the provision of financial services to the Irish market.

While I will have further engagement with the bank as the review process continues, I would like to emphasise that I have no role in the review or any commercial decisions arising from it. My officials will nevertheless continue to monitor developments.

In relation to the issue of the State using its shareholding in the banking sector to maximise competition, as the Deputy will be aware, the particular banks in which the State has a shareholding interest remain distinct market entities and they continue to provide an important competitive presence in the savings and loans markets. In support of this overall competitive approach, and in accordance with the commercial independence of those banks as provided for in the Relationship Frameworks agreements with those particular banks and which are legally binding documents that cannot be changed unilaterally, the commercial decision making of each of these institutions is a matter for the boards and management of each of those institutions in the same way as it is for the other banks and lenders operating in the Irish market.

Question No. 111 answered with Question No. 84.

Tax Rebates

Questions (112)

David Stanton

Question:

112. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Finance his plans to expand the start-up relief for entrepreneurs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30100/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

In Budget 2015, the Seed Capital Scheme (SCS) was relaunched and rebranded as SURE, or Start-up Refunds for Entrepreneurs. SURE provides a refund of tax paid in the previous 6 tax years to those in PAYE employment or those recently unemployed, where they invest funds into a new company set up by them.

The general conditions for SURE are that you must:

- establish a new company carrying on a new qualifying trading activity,

- have mainly PAYE income in the previous four years,

- take up full-time employment in the new company as a director or an employee,

- invest cash in the new company by purchasing new ordinary shares, and

- keep the purchased shares for at least four years.

A review of SURE was carried out and changes to the administration of the scheme were implemented in Finance Act 2018. From 1 January 2019 qualifying companies can submit applications for eligible SURE investments on a self-assessment basis. This means that a company that wishes to claim SURE no longer needs advance approval from Revenue. A company can satisfy itself that it qualifies for SURE and, accordingly, obtain certification on a self-assessment basis via the Revenue Online Service (‘ROS’).

While I have no plans at the present time for further changes to the scheme, these matters are kept under regular review.

Question No. 113 answered with Question No. 90.

Question No. 114 answered with Question No. 86.

Covid-19 Pandemic Supports

Questions (115)

Christopher O'Sullivan

Question:

115. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Finance if he is reviewing any of the Covid-19 support schemes under the remit of his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39193/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

In keeping with good practice, my officials review all schemes regularly to ensure that they are achieving their policy intention and are operating as expected.

In relation to accelerated corporation tax loss relief, I understand that Revenue received over 150 interim claims for accelerated corporation tax loss relief during the period 1 August to 30 October 2020 and the total cash value of those claims was over €43 million.

Revenue also publishes statistics on the Covid-19 support schemes it implements at https://www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/number-of-taxpayers-and-returns/covid-19-support-schemes-statistics.aspx.

Section 11 of the Finance Bill deals with the Covid Restrictions Support Scheme and makes specific provision for an assessment "no less frequently that every three months beginning on 13 October 2020" and a determination of whether changes should be made to the scheme. Therefore, I will be looking at this after the passage of the Bill through the Oireachtas.

A number of issues were raised at Committee stage of the Finance Bill around the extension of relief from VAT for protection equipment and the reduced VAT rate of 9%. These are being examined and will be addressed as the debate on the Finance Bill continues in the Oireachtas.

The Financial Provisions (Covid-19) (No. 2) Act 2020 which was signed into law on 1 August 2020 provides that I, as Minister for Finance, have a duty to monitor the Employment Wage Subsidy Scheme (EWSS) and have regular assessment carried out to determine whether it is necessary to adjust the level of certain elements of the scheme. If the view is formed that changes are necessary, having consulted with my colleagues the Minister for Social Protection and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform Public Expenditure, I am empowered to amend such elements by way of secondary legislation.

The specific elements that may be amended in this way relate to:

- the end date of the measure, which be extended to a date no later than 30 June 2021;

- the rate of subsidy that may apply and the applicable employee income thresholds that such rates would apply to; and

- the criteria of the turnover test that determines qualifying employers.

The operation of the EWSS and its effectiveness continues to be kept under close review especially in light of the introduction of the Level 5 public health restrictions. In this regard it is noted that the measure continues to support the employment of around 350,000 workers in around 35,000 employers per month and accordingly there are no plans to re-visit the core eligibility criteria for the EWSS at this time.

Tax Reliefs

Questions (116, 148)

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

116. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Finance his views on whether a film production company in receipt of section 481 tax relief claiming in the Labour Court or Workplace Relations Commission that it is not the employer of the film crew working on a film production funded by section 481 relief represents a breach of the declaration that company is required to sign in order to access the relief and that any company doing this should have the relief withdrawn; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39233/20]

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

148. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Finance the actions being taken to ensure that film production companies in receipt of section 481 tax relief are complying with the declaration on quality employment and training they are required to sign in order to access the relief; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39232/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

I propose to take Questions Nos. 116 and 148 together.

Section 481 TCA 1997 provides a 32% payable credit for eligible expenditure on film production in Ireland. The scheme is intended to act as a stimulus to the creation of an indigenous film industry in the State, creating quality employment opportunities and supporting the expression of the Irish culture.

The Deputy will be aware that a number of amendments were made to the Section 481 tax credit as part of Finance Act 2018. The certification process was amended, production companies are now required to apply to apply to the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media (DTCAGSM) before commencement of Irish production to have the film certified as a qualifying film.

As part of the application process, applicants must provide a skills development plan and, if the amount of eligible expenditure is over €2m, that plan must be agreed with Screen Ireland. A post project skills development report is also required for each project.

As part of the certification process undertaken by DTCAGSM, an applicant company is required to sign an undertaking of compliance with all relevant employment legislation. This undertaking is required to be signed and furnished with every section 481 application. These conditions shall be met by both the producer company and the qualifying company. If a producer does not comply with the employment and skills development requirements set out by the Minister they may not be eligible for the corporation tax credit. Any amount already claimed may be recoverable, with interest.

Adjudication of adherence to employment legislation is not within the remit of the Minister for Finance, however the importance of adhering to employment legislation has been reinforced by introducing the undertaking in respect of quality employment. The monitoring of compliance with employment rights legislation is primarily a matter for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment through the Workplace Relations Committee (WRC). Should the WRC determine that a company in receipt of section 481 tax relief has not complied with the relevant employment rights legislation, as stated, any amounts claimed may be recoverable with interest.

The Deputy will be aware that the WRC completed an audit of the Independent Film and Television Drama Production Sector this year, following a joint request by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU), the Services, Industry, Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU), and Screen Producers Ireland. The report, which was published in August, contains four recommendations, none of which are recommendations for changes to be made to Section 481. However the audit does recommend that a formal agreement between the majority of workers and employers, addressing pay, terms and conditions, would be beneficial for the industry. I understand that negotiations in this regard are currently ongoing between Screen Producers Ireland and the unions (of which the Guilds are also a part) and I am informed that the agreement should be finalised later this year.

As stated above, the creation of quality employment opportunities is a policy objective of the film credit and I have made a number of changes to the legislation in recent years to support this objective. My officials are following the progress in respect of the WRC recommendations and I will take further actions to support the key objectives of the credit in future if necessary.

Consumer Protection

Questions (117)

Pearse Doherty

Question:

117. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider legislation to strengthen the consumer protection code; his views on the lack of enforcement action taken by the Central Bank for breaches of the code; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39230/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

The Central Bank’s Consumer Protection Code 2012 (the Code) is a statutory Code issued pursuant to Section 117 of the Central Bank Act 1989. The Central Bank has the power to administer sanctions for a contravention of the Code under Part IIIC of the Central Bank Act 1942. The provisions of the Code are binding on regulated entities and must, at all times, be complied with by regulated entities.

The Code is a key component of the strong consumer protection framework in place for consumers of regulated financial service providers. The Code sets out the requirements that regulated entities must comply with when dealing with consumers in order to ensure a similar level of protection for consumers, regardless of the type of financial services provider. The Code sets out important protections in a range of areas, including in relation to pre-contractual and post-sale information, assessing suitability, claims processing, error and complaints resolution, arrears handling and advertising.

Since 2012, the Code has been strengthened a number of times, via addenda, to provide additional protections for consumers. These amendments include new requirements around variable rate mortgages, mortgage switching measures, and intermediary inducements.

A review of the Code is currently underway by the Central Bank. A public consultation on the Central Bank’s proposals for amendments will take place in 2021 giving all stakeholders an opportunity to make submissions. This review will also include transferring the Code into regulations in line with the regulation making powers given to the Central Bank in the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013.

The Central Bank has advised me that it continues to give focus to the Consumer Protection Codes in both its supervisory and enforcement work.

It is important to note that the Central Bank’s work to protect consumers is delivered across the entirety of the Bank, and is not just confined to the Code. The breadth of its mandate enables it to harness its collective wide-ranging policy, economic, financial stability and regulatory expertise in working to protect consumers. The stability of the system, and the resilience of firms within it, are as essential in protecting consumers and investors as our statutory codes of conduct, policy development, assertive supervision, authorisation gatekeeping and robust enforcement powers.

On the issue of enforcement, it is not the case that there has been a lack of enforcement action.

The Central Bank has a broad range of tools, which it carefully deploys in appropriate circumstances, including the imposition of sanctions but up to and including the revocation of authorisations and the refusal and prohibition of individuals. The Central Bank has taken a number of actions in these areas in furtherance of its consumer protection mandate.

Since 2006 the Central Bank has concluded 139 cases under its Administrative Sanctions Procedure framework with fines imposed of €123.98m. Of the 139 outcomes, 22 were imposed against individuals. The Central Bank has also taken action to revoke 28 firms’ authorisations on an involuntary basis. A further 13 firms were refused authorisation to undertake regulated activities.

While its enforcement work spans the entirety of its mandate and is wider than the Code alone, the Central Bank has a strong enforcement record in respect of outcomes which are integral to the Code. In this regard, the two largest monetary sanctions imposed to date by the Central Bank – Permanent TSB plc sanctioned €21million in 2019 and KBC Bank Ireland plc sanctioned €18.3million in 2020 - evidence the Central Bank’s commitment to taking robust enforcement action with real deterrence value where serious and significant breaches of the Code are committed.

Ultimately for all cases, whether they are specifically based on a breach of the Code, or another sector of legislation, it is important to note that while a case may not have been settled under the Code, protecting consumers is at the centre of all of the Central Bank’s enforcement outcomes.

Regarding legislation to strengthen consumer protection, the Programme for Government includes a Senior Executive Accountability Regime (SEAR), which will be the centrepiece of the forthcoming Central Bank (Amendment) Bill. The key focus of this legislation is to drive positive behaviour and encourage a culture of high standards that delivers better and fairer outcomes for consumers.

Officials in my Department are currently engaging with the Attorney General's Office in advance of submitting draft heads of Bill to Government so as to ensure that the correct balance is struck between appropriate additional powers for the Central Bank and the protection of individuals' constitutional rights.

It is my intention that draft heads of Bill will be presented to Government for approval in the near future.

Revenue Commissioners

Questions (118)

Paul Murphy

Question:

118. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for Finance if he will act to ensure that the Revenue Commissioners have the powers necessary to fully investigate potential cases of bogus self-employment. [39169/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

“Bogus self-employment” (sometimes referred to as “disguised employment”) is the description commonly given to a scenario where an individual engaged to do a job is wrongly classified as being self-employed by an employer who seeks to avoid employment related obligations. From a tax perspective, this relates to tax, USC and PRSI collected through the PAYE system. The implication for the individuals is that they do not have the benefit of certain employment related entitlements such as rates of pay, holiday pay or sick pay. In addition, as the rate of PRSI paid as a self-employed person differs from that payable by an employee, this affects an individual’s entitlements to certain social welfare benefits.

Revenue advise me that a worker’s employment status is not a matter of choice; it depends on the terms and conditions of the job. While it is usually clear whether an individual is employed or self-employed, it is not always obvious. However, case law has established tests to determine whether contracts are contracts for service (i.e. self-employed contractor) or contracts of service (i.e. employee). These tests need to be applied on a case by case basis to the fact pattern of each case.

Revenue also advise that in addition to the pure “bogus self-employment” phenomenon other service provision arrangements have emerged that are sometimes, and somewhat loosely, included within the term “bogus self-employment”. These are generally referred to as “intermediary structures” and include engagement of workers through “Personal Service Companies” (PSCs) and “Managed Service Companies” (MSCs). There are significant differences in company law treatment, social welfare treatment and tax treatment between the pure “bogus self-employment” phenomenon and the related corporate forms.

My Department, as part of a working group along with officials from the Department of Social Protection (DSP), with technical assistance from Revenue, published a report in January 2018 titled “The use of intermediary-type structures and self-employment arrangements: Implications for Social Insurance and Tax Revenues”. That report looked to identify and estimate any potential loss of tax and PRSI resulting from intermediary type structures and self-employment arrangements.

Revenue advises me that it monitors developments in labour market trends in conjunction with the DSP, with a view to seeing whether the Code of Practice and the rules around establishing employment and self-employment remain “fit for purpose” for construction and other sectors. As part of that ongoing work, Revenue are assisting DSP in developing a new Code for Determining Employment or Self-employment which is expected to be finalised early in 2021.

Finally, Revenue advise me that its compliance interventions include a focus on the practice of bogus self-employment and challenging the inappropriate classification of workers as self-employed contractors. I believe that Revenue has the powers necessary to fully investigate potential cases of bogus self-employment.

Question No. 119 answered with Question No. 86.

Motor Insurance

Questions (120, 141)

Paul McAuliffe

Question:

120. Deputy Paul McAuliffe asked the Minister for Finance his plans to implement the recommendations made in the report by the working group on reducing the cost of motor insurance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39117/20]

Alan Dillon

Question:

141. Deputy Alan Dillon asked the Minister for Finance the status of the implementation of the recommendations made in the report by the working group on reducing the cost of motor insurance; the number of outstanding recommendations yet to be implemented; the reason for same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38316/20]

Written answers

Minister for Finance

I propose to take Questions Nos. 120 and 141 together.

At the outset, I want to emphasise the key importance that Government places on the insurance reform agenda. This is reflected in the Programme for Government which identifies a range of issues that need to be tackled on a Whole-of-Government basis. This ambitious reform agenda is being led by the Cabinet Committee on Economic Recovery and Investment’s sub-Group on Insurance Reform. It is chaired by the Tánaiste, and includes Ministers McGrath, McEntee, O’Gorman, Ministers of State Troy and Fleming and myself as standing members. I strongly believe this cross-departmental approach provides the best opportunity to address the cost and availability of insurance and will build and upon previous commendable work done by the Cost of Insurance Working Group (CIWG) which produced two primary reports, the first on the cost of motor insurance and the second on the cost of employer and public liability insurance.

My Department published the CIWG’s Eleventh and Final Progress Update Report on 30 October. This illustrated that the vast majority of recommendations had been completed. It was also noted that taking account of the new Whole-of-Government approach, that the outstanding CIWG recommendations will now be implemented through the Cabinet Sub-Group on Insurance Reform. In that context, the four outstanding recommendations from the CIWG’s Motor Insurance report, including the reason for their delay, are as follows:

- Recommendation 16 – Ascertain and set out the measures necessary to implement Pre-Action Protocols (PAPs) for personal injury cases: The Department of Justice has advised that draft regulations on PAPs for medical negligence actions remain under discussion with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC). It has advised that they intend to move this work forward as a matter of urgency. The finalisation of these Regulations will then inform the work on the PAPs for personal injuries actions.

- Recommendation 22 – Examine the impact of legal and other fees on personal injury awards: The implementation of this recommendation was contingent on the establishment of the Office of the Legal Costs Adjudicators (OLCA), as provided for under the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015. The OLCA came into operation with effect from 7 October 2019. The Department of Justice has outlined that a period of at least one to two years from the time this new body became operational will be required before they will have an appropriate data baseline to commence a meaningful review.

- Recommendation 24 – Examine the setting of the discount rate (in personal injury lump sum awards), without prejudice to the outcome of relevant proceedings, and to be reviewed at regular intervals: The Department of Justice recently ran a public consultation and will provide a report once its review of the discount rate has concluded in the context of the new reform agenda.

- Recommendation 25 – Establish a fully functioning integrated insurance fraud database for industry to detect patterns of fraud: This recommendation has been delayed as a result of a number of data protection issues. These are currently being examined by the Department of Justice and other stakeholders.

Notwithstanding these outstanding recommendations, the Deputy will be aware that many positive reforms have been introduced to address the cost and availability of insurance through the CIWG. These include legislation to: strengthen the role of PIAB; to clarify and widen the role of the Insurance Compensation Fund; to provide access to information regarding claims; to provide more information to consumers at renewal; and to make it easier for businesses to challenge fraudulent claims. The cumulative impact of these changes has undoubtedly been a factor in helping to reduce motor premiums over the last number of years. The most recent CSO data indicates that the cost of motor insurance is now almost a third lower than it was at its peak in July 2016.

In conclusion, the CIWG’s remaining recommendations will be part of the Cabinet Sub-group’s work. The Deputy can rest assured that seeking to secure sustainable competition through deepening and widening the supply of insurance in Ireland is a key priority issue for the new Government and that Minister of State Fleming and I will play a lead role to ensure that progress is made in this policy area.