On 7 March last the Taoiseach stated: "I want to make it clear that the taking of houses from people is something we do not want to see and the banks themselves would see it only as a last resort." Today's edition of the Irish Examiner contains a heart-rending story about a couple in Kanturk, Martin and Claire O'Sullivan, who have three children under eight years of age and who are facing eviction from their home, the mortgage relating to which is approximately €180,000. They took out their mortgage with Smart Mortgages and their monthly repayments in respect of it are €1,000. Unfortunately, Martin, who is the sole earner, became unemployed and they are not in a position to meet their repayments. The couple have offered to make repayments of €400 per month, but this has been rejected by the mortgage company, which sent them a letter stating that the sheriff will be coming to evict them from their home.

By any standards, this is a shocking story and what has happened flies in the face of the kind of reassurances we were given in the House and elsewhere that this type of thing would not occur. Despite the change in the law, which has made it easier for banks to repossess properties, and the dilution of the code of conduct, which has essentially put them in the driving seat, it was stated that every effort and intervention would be made to prevent people from losing their family homes. The family in question have appealed to the Taoiseach to intervene. They are not alone. We know from the most recent CSO figures that 97,800 private residential mortgages have been in arrears for more than 90 days. Standing aside or remaining out of the fray will not help the families to whom I refer. There are options available. The intervention of State agencies is essential to help these families. I request that the Taoiseach appoint someone from his Department to ensure the Government and its agencies intervene in this case and provide a sustainable solution. I also request that all options be explored to prevent this couple and their three children from being evicted from their home.

I have seen some reports of the case to which Deputy Martin refers. While I do not want to discuss the details of any particular case, the situation stands as we have already said. House repossessions should be a very last resort. As the Deputy is aware, the Government provided a range of options for consideration in cases where persons are in mortgage distress. I understand exactly what the Deputy has said in respect of this particular couple. One of the mechanisms included in the relevant legislation by the Government is specifically designed to deal with cases where a situation such as that under discussion might arise. I refer to the right of a judge to put a legal stay on matters surrounding the repossession of a house until all options have been explored. That right applies in this case. I do not know what evidence or suggestions were presented or made in the court in this instance. There is a specific right included in the legislation whereby, in circumstances in which all options have not been explored, a legal stay on the repossession of a house can be put in place. That is why the opportunity should be made available in this particular case for a practitioner to consider the options available, the offers that were made by the couple involved on behalf of themselves and their children and the fact that the man is back in full employment. That would lead to a situation where all the options would be properly explored and followed through. No repossession would take place until that happened. The services of and options provided by the personal insolvency agency can be used in this instance and there is obviously also a consequence in that regard.

I do not have in my possession the details of the court case to date. In the context of specific cases of this nature, however, a right was included in the relevant legislation for a stay to be placed on prosecution and execution until all the options can be explored. I feel for this man, his wife and their children. I am not sure whether they or their advisers have engaged with the process of having a practitioner consider the matter or whether they have applied to the court to have that right applied to them. As stated, the Government has made it perfectly clear that the repossession of houses should be a very last resort. The couple involved are obviously not the owners of multiple properties and this matter relates to their family home.

The problem I have with that is that the Taoiseach seems to be washing his hand of the issue and passing the buck to the judicial system to deal with it at its discretion. I do not think that is a satisfactory response in this particular case. As recently as 9 July, the Taoiseach stated that everybody in this country recognises the value of the family home: "Everybody in this country recognises the value of the family home, perhaps more so than any other country." I put it to him that those words are meaningless if they are not followed up by solid intervention by Government agencies to prevent that which I describe from happening.

Yes.

If the eviction takes place, the couple involved will invariably end up on the housing list and the county council will be obliged to purchase a house for them in good time or at some stage. In the event that the couple are obliged to rent a property, rent allowance will have to be paid. If the eviction is followed through to its conclusion, it will end up costing the taxpayer more. Of course, that does not take into account the distress and anxiety caused to this family and others like them. We suggested that an independent mortgage resolution office should be established and that such an entity would have real independent oversight with regard to the relationships between mortgage companies, banks and their customers.

The lack of such independent oversight is a major flaw in the regime currently in place. The banks and the mortgage companies are in the driving seat 100% on these issues and the State cannot just leave it to the discretion of the judicial system alone. There must be more solid intervention using the full apparatus of the State.

Will the Taoiseach intervene? Will he appoint an official in government or in his Department to intervene in this case? Do I take it from his original reply that he will not do that? Can he clarify that? Will he appoint someone to explore options in this case and to intervene on behalf of the family?

As I have pointed out to the Deputy, house repossessions are a very sensitive issue in this country. I think everybody agrees that, over the years, even when we did not have the extent of lending we had during the so-called Celtic tiger years, there were always a small number of house repossessions. When I served on the local authority many years ago, it applied in a small number of cases in particular circumstances.

I do not know the details of the case the Deputy mentioned. I understand it involves a man, his wife, their three small children and their family home. They took out a mortgage and made repayments. They took out a second facility and it is the provider of that facility which seems to have taken the case here. If I understand it correctly, this case went to court. To deal with this in a completely independent fashion, the Government put in a right for that man and his wife and for anybody in this circumstance to have the court set aside all legal proceedings about repossession until all the options are explored. It is not true to say the banks have 100% authority here. That is why the Insolvency Service of Ireland was set up.

The law was changed to give them greater influence.

While the banks have a say in this, there is a follow through to a bankruptcy claim or whatever. I do not know what the legal adviser to the man and his wife and family has done about this, but that right was put in place in a completely independent fashion in the knowledge that house repossession is a very sensitive issue in this country. I know that it is where I come from, and Kanturk is no different.

All the options should be explored in this case. One option put in deliberately by Government to help protect consumers is to give them the right and the time and space for every opportunity to be explored and delivered on. These people have made an offer. As I said, the courts are entirely independent but that right was inserted in the law by Government to allow for the protection of people from house repossessions until all options are properly explored.

Will the Taoiseach intervene? Will he appoint someone to intervene?