Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

I hope the Minister of State can hear me okay. He can. I will talk about motor insurance. I am reminded of the words of the late great Woody Guthrie who said that, as he travelled through life, he met many kinds of men; some would rob him would rob him with a six-gun and others with a fountain pen. I certainly think that is applicable to the insurance industry in this country. The area of motor insurance really underlines that point. I put it to the Minister of State that the issue here is, first and foremost and overwhelmingly, one of plain old-fashioned profiteering. Even a cursory look at the facts underlines that this is the case.

I will not try to blind the committee with science or with an avalanche of facts and figures, but let us have a look at a few. Between 2009 and 2019, the volume of claims decreased substantially, by 45%. The cost of claims was also down 9%. One would expect that, in those circumstances, premiums would have fallen but not only have they not fallen, they increased by 35% between 2009 and 2019. It is little wonder that profits of €142 million were raked in by the motor insurance sector. This was once again an increase on the previous year, and not by a small amount but by 9%. That is quite a hike in this space over only 12 months. How does this compare to other jurisdictions? Many of the big insurance corporations that operate in this State also operate in the UK. Do they get more bang for their buck in the UK or in the Republic of Ireland? There is no comparison. They make nearly double the profits per unit of investment here that they do in the UK.

Fundamentally, a stop must be put to this profiteering. There is only question really worth considering. What is the best and most effective way to put a halt to profiteering and to provide an efficient service of good quality for the population? That is only real issue here. From many of the contributions to this discussion, and certainly from those of the Minister of State, it seems to be taken as a given that it is all about competition. Motor insurance could actually be organised in such a way that there would be zero competition while providing a far better and cheaper reliable service for ordinary people. It happens in other jurisdictions. In some other jurisdictions, the cost of motor insurance claims for a given year is calculated and a little bit more is added to allow for rollover of certain investments. The number of motorists using petrol and diesel respectively is calculated. An additional charge is then levied on petrol and diesel which then builds up the fund to pay the costs of motor insurance payouts. That has been done in the past in New Zealand and in various provinces of Canada.

It is not a particularly complex scheme to work out. That would be one way of doing it.

I would favour focus on and debate around the idea that the people have been bled dry for years by the motor insurance rip-off. Let us look at the idea of public ownership and nationalisation. Does that mean compensation for shareholders? Yes it does if it is a pension fund or an ordinary person who has invested a few bob in shares, but for millionaire and billionaire shareholders, then no, it does not. Then the resources available to society are used for the common good and providing a decent service but eliminating the profit motive from it. I am open to a discussion and debate around those points but it should be on the basis of how we get to the root of the issue here, and the root of the issue is profiteering. The debate has to be around the best way to eliminate profiteering from the insurance industry. Does the Minister of State accept the proposition that the fundamental problem here is profiteering? If he does not accept that, I want to hear an argument against it because it seems that the facts speak very clearly to it and the majority of ordinary people who have experienced the insurance racket and the motor insurance rip-off would be interested in hearing the argument against that because I think they are convinced that is the case.