Mr. Gerry O'Brien:

I agree with that. The 481 system was simply a tool of convenience really. It worked for a period but we are now seeing the problems in it. We did not look too far down the road initially but it actually prevents the provisions of article 19 on transparency, which is demanded by the EU directive, from occurring. Deputy Boyd Barrett is quite right that the DAC disappears and there is no tracking. I spoke to my friends in England who had a similar incident with what they call special purpose vehicle, SPV, company that closed down. They lost all of the deeds of title to where the rights went but they managed to reopen it. The DAC was not just gone; they managed to reinvigorate it and got their settlement for the actors. It was quite a substantial settlement and it was agreed on the steps of the court because they did not want us to pursue where the DAC had gone. It is a flawed tool and it was a tool of convenience. I agree that we could probably look at a better structure but it is the only one we have now. To mitigate it, we simply have to go back to legislation and make sure that the EU directive on transparency applies to the DAC at the point where it is being wound up. We have to know where everything is going. It has to be presented to us in writing.