Mr. Richie Boucher:

The staff numbers are from a point in time and the reductions are over a period. I do not believe the Senator's conclusion or assertion is correct, although I can understand how the Senator has made it while considering two different sets of figures.

With regard to rent receivers, tenants may be paying rent that is diverted. There is a requirement to professionalise the way the matter is dealt with by the rent receiver, which has obligations to abide by contracts. The tenant would have a lease agreement that I presume would be registered with the Private Residential Tenancies Board. The receiver would have a commercial interest in seeing that done, as the receiver wants to see income flowing. We appoint a receiver when we have evidence that income is being diverted. The apartment or house may be occupied, with the tenant paying rent, but we are not getting it. The tenant's occupancy would be endangered if that happens. A rent receiver must respect obligations and ensure, for example, that if management charges are payable, they are paid. There is professionalisation and regularisation of the process.

The Senator mentioned a Which? survey but I should note that the survey was of products we do not have. We do not provide a current account in Britain, although we provide them in Northern Ireland. A MORI survey of current accounts provided in Northern Ireland indicated customer satisfaction levels to be very high. We need to appreciate what is being surveyed. Our current account is offered only in Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom. We run the operation in Northern Ireland as an island of Ireland business but from a regulatory perspective, it must be part of the UK division.

We review the competitive environment and if state aid is being utilised to distort competition, we object to it.