I also seek a debate on the code of conduct on mortgage arrears. I accept it is asking the impossible of the Leader that he have the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, in the House today. I am not even convinced that is a good idea because I believe we need time to digest what is contained in the code of conduct on mortgage arrears and the responses of other groups to it. The Leader will be aware that I have called for a debate on this issue on a number of occasions. I am disappointed we did not have an opportunity to have an input into the code of conduct on mortgage arrears before its publication. In my opinion, it is a akin to closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

It was stated on publication of the report that the code of conduct was arrived at following engagement with a number of consumer interests. I would like to know the consumer interests with whom there was engagement.

There is evidence that organisations such as FLAC were not engaged with in the context of their concerns. I would like to establish how many distressed mortgage holders were engaged with when conclusions were being reached in respect of the code of conduct relating to mortgage arrears. While I accept that there has been a degree of rowing back on some of the initial proposals, I do not believe this should blind us to the fact that the code of conduct on mortgage arrears is more generous to lending institutions than it is to distressed borrowers. That is the reality of the matter.

Hear, hear.

In the context of tracker mortgages, for example, Mr. Bernard Sheridan, the director of consumer protection with the Central Bank, has stated, "No doubt the lenders would prefer more options to move people off trackers but to do so they have to offer ... an alternative which is affordable and sustainable". One of the difficulties which arises relates to who determines what is affordable and sustainable. Under the code of conduct on mortgage arrears, it will be the banks that will make determinations in this regard.

There is a need to examine the code of conduct from the perspective of those who are the least advantaged, namely, distressed borrowers. In any legal scenario, it should be the contra proferentem rule which applies. In other words, the interpretation should be against the stronger party and in favour of the weaker one. I would, therefore, welcome a debate on this matter. There is a real suspicion among distressed borrowers that because the housing market has turned the corner, banks which were previously unwilling to engage with them in order to reach settlement of one form or another are now not only willing but are prepared to do so with an alacrity that would leave a modest virgin blushing.

Hear, hear.