Debate on financial secrecy
Senator Norris welcomes developments on marriage equality but chiefly demands parliamentary debate on financial secrecy, banking accountability and the exclusion of elected representatives from key decisions.
I agree with Senator Bacik's comments on the French vote. It will become the 14th state to accept full gay marriage, which is greatly to be welcomed. As for the Constitutional Convention, despite the best efforts of reactionary forces, which in my opinion discredited themselves, if one distributes the undecided vote, the actual vote was well over 80%. While I consider this to be very heartening, we can look forward to a campaign in Ireland which will be extremely nasty, as unfortunately was that led by some of the Christian churches in France. There has been an immense increase in the number of violent attacks on gay people in France. Places of resort of the gay community have been attacked viciously and people have been injured and have been disfigured for life. This is at the instigation of the Christian churches. Shame on them and let this not, under any circumstances, happen in this country.
I refer to a matter I raised yesterday when I made a request of the Leader. I have spoken to him subsequently and he is in the process of inquiring after it but I now am convinced it is the case. I refer to a report that appeared at the beginning of the week in the Irish Examiner under the headline, "ECB gags State on IBRC liquidation". This headline should send a shudder down every decent democrat. A bank, that is, an unelected group of financial twits, presumes to dictate to a democratically-elected Government what it shall and shall not do in respect of informing its own public. We are expected to pay for this but once again, we are not allowed to know who we are paying or the procedures under which this is being done.
A senior official is quoted in the newspaper as saying that they have received instructions from the ECB not to release anything to the public.
Comment on this
By God I am; I most certainly am. I am sure everybody in this House would want a debate because this is a Parliament elected by various means. The other House is another part of our Parliament. We are not allowed to say anything. The bankers who have led us into this slaughterhouse are still dictating to us. I find that grossly offensive, immoral and probably unconstitutional. A spokesperson for the Department of Finance said it is, unfortunately, a lot more secretive than we are. It is not tolerable.
There are repercussions for people down the chain. I have a communication from someone who is in the process of purchasing a property in liquidation from the IBRC. He has paid the deposit. He has agreed the sale. He has got a mortgage and he is paying it. He is still paying rent but he cannot get the keys of the house and he cannot get any information. This man is going to be driven into bankruptcy by people in Europe because he is not allowed to know or to nudge things along. All the material has been provided but he cannot find out anything. That is not tolerable. I ask the Leader to organise a debate on the issue.
This point might appear inconsistent but I do not think it is. I will end on it. The issue relates to the chief executive of Bank of Ireland. I had to laugh this morning when I heard people on the radio who I remember very clearly fulminating in favour of Anglo Irish Bank and its proceeds and proceedings and attacking this man for what he was doing. I do not know anything about it but I will say this. I can understand the position of the Government because if one is trying to realise an asset one does not send out a message to the international community that one has no confidence in the person who is running the bank. I do not like the capitalist system at all-----