Professor Niamh Hardiman:

I am not an expert on corporate governance; I have to say that from the outset. Therefore, my knowledge is second hand and I am not sure how valuable specific comments would be. I have read reports, including a PhD thesis by a student of mine who has investigated the activities of non-executive directors. I reference that in my paper. The student suggested there is room for non-executive directors to change some aspects of their practices. She suggested that, quite apart from exercising risk and compliance functions within banks, non-executive directors could exercise a greater voice and challenge usefully. Preparation and information are very important, as are challenge and debate, and opportunities to facilitate these inside banks are important also. I have made mention of the in camera sessions apparently held in Canadian banks. These are practices that seem to have worked well for the Canadian banks. As I understand it, they do not seem to have been common in Irish banks.

There are codes of practice for directors of banks. A lot of the professional reflection is now being guided by developments in Britain including, for example, the common code recommendations in the Walker review of 2009, where some of the advice for directors is very much along the lines of developing information, engaging with challenging behaviour and engaging in the type of critical debate I am characterising as the enemy of groupthink.