Mr. Jeremy Masding:

The story is as follows: when I last appeared before the joint committee, I explained to members that we had submitted a high-level restructuring plan to demonstrate that we felt there was a journey to viability. We were then tested by the troika and the authorities over the following 12 months to determine whether we could actually create some momentum in the organisation. I of course would argue that we did. The fact I would put before members to demonstrate we have passed the first test is that for the record, management does not submit the restructuring plan, the shareholder does so. The fact that the shareholder has agreed to submit the restructuring plan on the back of 12 months of fantastic work by my team hopefully will give members some confidence that there is a future for this organisation.

The restructuring plan was submitted on 16 August. At a high level, it basically comprises, as we talked about in the half-year results, a bank-plus-two strategy, namely, the core retail bank that is absolutely essential for competition in this country, the asset management unit, on which I hope we have shown the joint committee that we are making progress and then of course we have some non-core portfolios. I am confident that this plan will be approved. We discussed it in detail with all the stakeholders beforehand and I think the delivery and the attitude of my people over the past 12 months in any event requires that they be given a chance to build it up. It is clear that there is an issue with the tracker book but I think it is really important that I kill a myth. Not all trackers are bad.

What we did was put all of the tracker mortgages on a big table like pieces of jigsaw and had two tests, the first of which was a total yield test - the base rate plus the margin. The second was whether they were performing and what were the characteristics of performance. In the restructuring plan we have submitted we have found €9 billion of tracker mortgages which we think are sustainable and would help in terms of the profitability of the good bank.

At the back end of the plan, 2017, one of the key jobs for any chief executive will be to create options for the shareholder. By running a bank, the good bank, the asset management unit, AMU, and the non-core business, I am trying to give the Minister, Deputy Michael Noonan, and his team options for the future of Permanent TSB. What does "options" mean? One could separate the good bank or one could separate the good bank and the AMU. It is too early to make that call. My job is to continue to build the franchise. I am confident that the team I have around me will deliver and that over time we will create a business model that will be attractive to investors.

In summary, we do have a future. The first test was whether we would survive, when many thought we would not, and we did. The second was whether the shareholder had enough confidence in us to submit a restructuring plan and the shareholder has. The restructuring plan will be approved and then the test for us will be whether we can deliver on it through to 2017.

For the record, it is rarely mentioned that there are 2,200 staff who work for Permanent TSB and who are absolutely committed to the survival of their bank. As the committee will be aware, they have made many sacrifices. I genuinely do not feel now is the right time to pull the rug from under their feet. The plan is compelling and fact-based. It has the same quality that the committee has seen this morning. We deserve a chance to compete in this market.