Mr. Robert Watt:

That case related to a situation we have since addressed. When we issued clarification on this issue in February 2010, we made it clear that any contract arrangements involving severance payments, added years or enhanced pension entitlements on exiting for CEOs would have to receive prior approval when the contract was being signed. We also said that when the payments were being made, we would have to check that they were appropriate in the context of the terms of the contract. The contracts in these two instances were entered into in the late 1990s. We were informed about these deals when the payments were being made. The payments were based on the contractual arrangements into which people had been signed, so there was no leeway for the State at that stage. It had no choice other than to make the payments. We have tightened up the rules to ensure all contracts have to be cleared and approved by us in advance. That allows us to approve the actual termination of payments at the time of the signing of the contract. We have addressed the gap that existed. The case mentioned by the Deputy is a historical one that goes back to contracts signed in the late 1990s.