Mr. Pat Houlihan:

That corresponds with our experience in the matter. One would imagine that if second tier firms were to specialise in dealing with certain matters and were then to seek to amalgamate and merge, it might help, but that has not happened. Nobody can force them to do it. It is as simple as that.

Deputy Anthony Lawlor referred to the liberalisation of ownership rules and wondered why we did not have a problem. We do not have a problem because there are checks and balances to ensure nothing inappropriate can occur. There are independence criteria that would always be applied to an entity that one audits as between the auditor and the audit entity; one certainly would not have Coca Cola buying into one of the big four and then being audited by that firm. That simply could not happen. We do not have a strong view on the matter. If it enables these entities to capitalise themselves - if that is what they want to do - there are enough checks and balances built in to prevent the scenario about which the Deputy is thinking from occurring.

The Deputy asked about three member states and the ESMA. I must admit I do not know the names, but Luxembourg may be one of them. To be honest with the Deputy, I am not sure what the significance is. The ESMA is in the finance area, to put it in very broad terms, and I am not sure what significance should be attached to the fact that these three member states have an audit that is linked. What will have to happen in order that other member states can agree that the ESMA can have the role the Commission wishes to apportion to it is that a genuine link will have to be made between the undertaking of audits in the member states and the ESMA in order that there will not be one body operating in the financial sector making rules and regulations and giving edicts to audit entities in terms of the governance structures in place. That is our take on the point at issue.

The Deputy commented on the length of time involved. In one sense, there are mixed views. We need to get it right - I think the Deputy himself made this point - because it could be with us for a long time and we do not want to hurry on it, but, equally, we do not want to delay because one loses impetus.

Let me reassure the Deputy on Ireland's prospective stewardship of these dossiers. We will be keen, if at all possible, to bring them to a conclusion and adoption. The indications are not all that hopeful at this stage, but we will work hard. We have had approximately 12 meetings of the working group to move matters along. I can assure the committee that we will give it everything we have in this regard.

Deputy Áine Collins who rode to our rescue in one sense - I am being jocular - placed the emphasis on the apportioned role of the auditor as distinct from the role others might imagine an auditor should play and had some useful statements to make. On mandatory rotation every three to five years, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Obviously, there will be many big players involved and it could come down to a tight contest in terms of what period will be picked. I imagine that the voting rights of member states will be called into play on this issue because it is a tie-breaker in dealing with the entire dossier. The Deputy clarified the point on medium-sized auditors.

Deputy Peadar Tóibín referred to the liberalisation of ownership rules. I am not sure there is such liberalisation. I have already referred to this issue. I do not think there is a risk. If somebody points out to us where it is, we will certainly seek to ameliorate it.

As I cannot read my writing, I am not sure whether there was another question. Was another question put at the end?