Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome that because I do not think we should go over 80%. I believe that was the cause of the problem, which included Ulster Bank. In the history of this decade, albeit before Mr. Brown's time, Ulster Bank changed from being an industrial bank to being a major ingredient in the Irish property bubble. I have discussed this with people such as Frank O'Reilly, the previous chancellor of Trinity College. This was a huge mistake, as we need banks that get involved in industry and agriculture and do not become so exclusively property-based as did Ulster Bank and all the others as well. I believe that behaving that way was the core of the problem and that loan-to-value ratios should never again exceed 80%.

I refer to the letters that were issued as part of the 5,176 adjustments, that is, legal letters were issued in 4,128 cases and long-term solutions amounted to 1,048. I believe Mr. Bell referred to this issue earlier. Does issuing such letters meet what the Central Bank was trying to do or, as was hinted earlier, is it that when banks come under pressure, they redefine the rules to define these letters as being part of the adjustment?