Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Well, first of all, I think the fact is that nowadays, the accounting profession, legal firms, there tend to be a very small number of very large firms. That obviously has certain advantages but I think it also has disadvantages in the fact that one firm may be providing a whole range of services, and while firms have Chinese walls, whether in accounting or legal, that they don't share information, I certainly think that more diversity in terms of the functions that are carried out, perhaps by a bigger number of firms, would lead to perhaps more questioning. But standard audits, Deputy, are designed to elicit certain information, whereas our banks faced a liquidity crisis. And, of course, in the long run, and often in the very short run, a liquidity crisis turns into a solvency crisis. Now, the audits of the banks and, you know, auditors, can ... there were internal auditors, but, you know, we have heard that internal auditors in certain circumstances did raise questions but they were contrarian views, very often were treated in that way, so they weren't well regarded. I think the critical issue is that we have a more open society in terms of information, so that legitimate questions can be put. I often found myself in a very contrarian position because I was questioning the orthodox explanation in relation to how the bubble was building up. What surprises me, as I look back in the context for preparing for this, that in the history of commerce and banking and so on, bubbles are a constant problem. And I'm just surprised that none of the institutions, as I look back, ever really seem to have queried or questioned the bubble. The explanation then was a liquidity crisis and no one, as Deputy Rabbitte said earlier, seems to have then said, "But if a liquidity crisis is serious enough, it's actually going to bring the whole institution down." And, unfortunately, that's what happened. But auditors and people like that have their role to play.