Mr. Dermott Jewell:

It is always about the data. We have the capacity and the expertise. It is not that long ago that I was speaking to the actuarial individual who took all of the data. He is more than happy to do it again. He just needs to be given the data and he can deal with it. This will not happen overnight because it is not an easy task. There is a mountain of figures, but he can do it. We have the expertise. The Chair is entirely right when he says that if we brought someone in to ascertain what exactly the underlying element is - bringing in a team of people would probably make it quicker - it would be money very well spent.

I would like to give a direct answer to the Chair's requests. He is entirely right. It is all very fine hearing all the problems. We know them. What can we do? It would be better if we knew what to do. A great deal has changed. There was a difficulty with the reserves many years ago, as the Chair has correctly mentioned, but that improved. Then we had another difficulty and now the reserves are not good for the industry providers. There is no question about that. It is the same all over. We acknowledge that interest rates are appallingly low. We have to wonder whether they are trying to rebuild their reserves. They are open to being told, "You must be rebuilding reserves, as opposed to the cost of claims, until you tell us that is not the case, but you will not tell us that is not the case because we cannot understand and you are not even trying to help us to understand." It would be helpful if we could see the underlying costs. That might give us an opportunity to approach the matter in the sense of a designed level of cover for a particular individual. In such circumstances, at least we could eliminate the phenomenon of drivers not being covered.

Almost without exception, there is cover for third party, fire and theft or comprehensive. There used to be another basic level of affordable insurance that anyone could have so that he or she could drive a vehicle safely, but that does not seem to be there anymore. The market needs to change to ensure offers are understandable and value for money and, importantly, allow a vehicle that has been approved by the State to be safely put on the road to be driven affordably by someone who must legally have insurance.

Without question, we must examine the way in which claims are paid. An approach is taken in the UK and there is an attempt to do the same in Ireland. Rather than a large lump sum, an insurer would pay for someone's care until he or she was well. There is much credence and sensibility in this, but we must bear in mind that we cannot just go from one to the other. It is fine to be able to pay a doctor if one is ill, but one needs to be able to live as well. Some form of support is required, but it needs to be managed and reasonable.

I have never heard anyone say that he or she would have a word with the Judiciary to get its view. A book of quantum is about to be restored and reviewed, but is it not the case that we cannot ask the Judiciary whether, since everyone is shamefully blaming it for the cost situation, it can do anything about it? The Judiciary would not be impressed. Neither would I were I a judge and someone told me that this was my fault. It cannot all be the Judiciary's fault. It is down to the lack of information and sharing, which is why I will refer to the MIAB. There is no need for everyone to meet around the table. That would be ridiculous. I was a member of the MIAB. It was difficult work.

The committee could determine to engage with every member, but not just in finite terms. In other words, its invitation was fantastic and appreciated and there would be no problem with the invitation being issued again, but to a meeting of a different format where information, details, statistics and data on this, this and this were requested. Hopefully, we would then start moving in a direction and the committee will have materials to compare.