Sinn Féin's Dáil motion on trackers to be discussed this Tuesday at 8 pm

Summary of Michael McGrath speech


. Outline of the issue
. Central bank consumer protection not playing champions league
. Aib 3.67%, ptsb 3.25%
. Concerted effort across all banks
. Investigate banks
. Criminal investigation if needed
. Quarterly meeting with central bank
. Customers who lost their homes
. Check mortgage contract
. Can we believe bank of Ireland
 
He also said (not exact quote) that the investigation can not be trusted. (Central bank, investigators, banks, etc) That it was up to each individual themselves to fight their case for their tracker.
 
What was Doherty speaking in Irish?

And I agree with anybody who say can we believe banks.
 
Re my quote above it was Michael McGrath who stated each individual must fight themselves for the tracker.

Both Michael McGrath and Pearse Doherty were outstanding! It was excellent from 8pm until 9pm then went off the beaten track.
 
Minister Noonan last night during the private members motion. He did not even disguise the fact he was not interested. All he did was read out press releases taken from the Central Bank website, word for word. He hardly even added any context. I recited it word for word with him. Sadly I knew them word for word.

Only on the Friday before I recited the exact same press releases to AIB to remind them of their obligations. I wrote the press releases down word for word from the CB website, then I wrote them out again to assist so I would be more familiar with the wording.
I then rang AIB and read it out to the person on the other end, word for word so it was clear we both knew what AIB's obligations were and then asked them to address my specific questions.

Didn't have quiet the impact I had hoped for bit I did become very familiar with the CB press release wording...

Maybe Minister Noonan was eves dropping on my call, and like the cut of my jib....
Or else we was just lazy, did not feel like preparing for something he will not take action anyway and decided to just read out statements that were issued last year.
 
There has been a bit of press coverage saying roughly speaking what is reported above

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/poli...spicable-actions-have-caused-misery-1.2950012

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/sinn-feins-pearse-doherty-says-9684902

The Irish Mirror explains the position

"Fine Gael refused to support the motion in its current form, with party insiders saying that while the bill had merit, the “inherent negative criticism” of the Central Bank put forward were problematic for the Government."

Not sure why the Government doesn't want to be explicitly critical of the Central Bank.

They are causing an unnecessary vote which will be carried by the force of numbers.

Brendan
 
I won't lie I couldn't even watch all Noonans speech. Interested as I am I actually couldn't take in a word listening to how lack lustre he sounded. Extremely impressed with both Pearse Doherty and Michael McGrath. They bolster my faith that all hope is not lost.
 
Minister Noonan amendment was deafeated they now voting on Michael Mcgrath amendment I believe.
 
Ok so Michael McGrath amendment was approved, does anyone know does this mean the motion is accepted - just with the ammendmants Michael McGrath made.

His ammendments were not huge I don't believe.

Any politicaly savy poster explain to me what happens next?
 
As I understand it the motion is approved with the McGrath amendment so it's been carried. His amendment did make sense to be fair.
 
This is not a Bill. It's only a motion. I don't think it has any effect other than to generate welcome publicity for the issue as it highlights the government's lack of interest and the Central Bank's lack of action.

Brendan
 
Here's the best explanation of what a motion is:

A motion is a formal proposal by a member to do something.[1] Motions are the basis of the group decision-making process.[2] They focus the group on what is being decided.

Generally, a motion should be phrased in a way to take an action or express an opinion. A motion to not do something should not be offered if the same result can happen without anything being done.[3] Such a motion could result in confusion if the assembly does not want to not do it.[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_(parliamentary_procedure)
 
Here is the final wording, including the FF amendment:I have highlighted what I see as the main changes in red.

Brendan


“notes that:
— the wrongful denial of mortgage holders of their right to revert to a tracker rate following a period on a fixed interest rate, or the failure to restore mortgage holders to the correct tracker mortgage rate they were entitled to, has affected thousands of families;

— the damage caused by the action of the banks involved goes far beyond a purely financial effect and that the effects it has had on the health and social wellbeing of families, along with the accompanying social exclusion, must also be considered;

— the confirmed cases number at least 11,700 and that many more may still possibly emerge with the Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland stating that up to 15,000 is a reasonable estimate;

— the exceptional economic circumstances prevailing at the time this wrong doing was ongoing may well have resulted in a more pronounced effect and impact on families affected throughout Ireland;

— the occurrence of this practice across the banking system was widespread and systemic and resulted in thousands of families being denied their contractual rights;

— the banks have admitted that dozens of families have lost their home as a result with AIB admitting to 14 cases, Ulster Bank to 15 cases, Permanent TSB to 22 and other banks not yet disclosing the number;

— it seems certain that there are also homes which were surrendered and were a voluntary or agreed sale, the numbers of which are not yet captured but should also be considered a loss of home;

— in October 2015, the Central Bank of Ireland launched an industry wide examination into this practice, and this remains ongoing; and

— the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach, is currently examining this issue and has agreed to invite the Central Bank of Ireland to attend before the Committee on a quarterly basis, and it remains open to the Committee to issue a report and make recommendations on any aspect of this scandal;


commends the families and advisors that have campaigned to bring this scandal to light and pledges its support to all those affected;

condemns the widespread and scandalous abuse of mortgage holders’ rights carried out by multiple banks in which tracker mortgages and the applicable rates were denied to those who were entitled to them;

supports a comprehensive redress scheme that truly works for the customers affected, with a full right to access to tracker mortgages at the rate agreed as per the contract or at the rate applicable at the time the contract was entered into and compensation, taking into account the financial and social impact of the bank’s behaviour;

calls on the Central Bank of Ireland to impose a deadline for the banks to conclude their investigations, to put in place a redress and compensation scheme, and to have as the overarching priority, looking after the customers who have been directly affected;

calls for the Central Bank of Ireland investigation to uncover the grounds under which each lender decided or chose to carry out this level of wrong doing;

calls for an independent review of existing law to ascertain if sufficient powers exist to hold individuals responsible for their actions in financial matters;


calls on the Government to bring forward any such legislation that is identified as being necessary as a result of this examination, to ensure that individuals in financial institutions can be held accountable for any white collar crime that may occur; and

calls on the Central Bank of Ireland to use all of the available statutory powers to establish the truth of what happened in this case, including a detailed account of how it happened, who was responsible and to be led by the evidence in bringing any matters to other statutory bodies as appropriate.”
 
Back
Top