Michael Noonan (Limerick East, Fine Gael)

We do not know what the Minister's system of regulation will be. We take it on trust, but the Minister asks us to take a great deal on trust. I support the amendment and especially the call by Deputy Richard Bruton that we debate the matter. The Minister should share more with us. The banks operate very secretively and it is time there was more transparency.

The story appears to be that sometime one night recently chaos descended on the Irish banking system and the Minister had to stay up all night to save a bank from going down the tubes. I do not know the facts and I do not want to know the facts about that matter, but I wish to know — I cannot measure the effectiveness of the Bill without knowing this — was the crisis a liquidity or a solvency crisis? If it was a liquidity crisis, the very fact the Minister has published this legislation, that deposits which were moving out of the Irish banking system now seem to be moving back and because now inter-bank loans will be guaranteed here, means the banks can borrow all the money they want in the inter-bank system.

Publication of the Bill should solve the problem if it is a liquidity problem solely, and the Minister will probably not be asked to invoke it. If, on the other hand, there is a solvency problem attached to the liquidity problem or if the solvency problem was the primary issue when the Minister stayed up all night with the Taoiseach and the various bankers, that is a different matter. If it is a solvency issue that caused the crisis, it will not be resolved by publication of the Bill and there will be a transfer of taxpayers' money at some point, probably sooner rather than later, to underpin one or more of the financial institutions in question. The Minister must make clear to the House the genesis of the crisis. Is it liquidity, solvency or both because what solves the liquidity problem — this Bill — will not necessarily solve the solvency problem without it being implemented in a detailed way. That is the difficulty I have with it.

It is also difficult to measure the effectiveness of the Bill, given that the Minister is granting himself very strong powers, as provided for at the end of the Bill. Effectively, he is transferring the notification provisions of the Competition Act to himself from the Competition Authority. Is that a case of the Minister deciding that while he can he will take more power or is there something in the background about a merger or an acquisition which requires the Bill to be brought through the Houses quickly?

See this speech in context