Mr. Michael Fingleton:

Well, I think the internal audit report done by KPMG was a very good one and it was in the context of the original internal auditor leaving the society and engaging in ... with ... or employing a new internal auditor and it was appropriate at the time that we would seek, or the board would seek, the best advice possible in how we could structure or restructure - whatever way you want to put it - the department or the section of the ... pertaining to the internal audit. And they did but they found a lot of positives. They found, Deputy, that we'd a strong audit committee in place. And the audit committee was extremely strong and dealt in detail on reports from the internal audit and, indeed, effectively supervised the internal auditor in his reports and in his activities. And the credit committee was made up of all of the non-executive directors. So they had a full, detailed knowledge of the business ... of the micro-business of the organisation. They said we had strong mandate ... there was a strong mandate for internal audit; they said funding available to enhance the section was available; they said the internal audit used a risk-based methodology; they said an audit manual was in place; they said large exposures were reviewed regularly. The new head of internal audit function was thought very highly of throughout the business and there was an expectation that improvements would occur, as advised by KPMG-----