Mr. Declan Carlyle:

Yes. It is a position paper. At the time, it concerned the fact that the CIÉ board was considering not paying 3.6 times or 2.7 times employee contributions. That did not happen and other options were put on the table. Consideration of a contingent asset was discussed at the time.

In terms of the current offer at the Workplace Relations Commission, there is an undertaking that CIÉ would seek the use of a contingent asset in the resolution of the current situation. That is no different. These are position papers that were put to the board. Ultimately, the board decided not to grant pension increases. There were no pension pay awards until 2016. The actuary's recommendation, which is provided in the appendix to the replies given to parliamentary questions, confirms a required funding level of 2.8 times and 2.3 times employee contributions. At that time, there was considerable engagement with the trade union group. The CIÉ group recognises five unions. There are four worker directors and there is collective representation at all levels of the organisation. There was extensive engagement with the trade group at that time. Indeed, the trade union position was that when paid 3.6 times and 2.7 times employee contributions that perhaps, under a review, the trade union would consider CIÉ's request for a 30% increase in its contribution.

That is confirmation that CIÉ's position, in the past two years regarding a review being required if those contributions are exceeded, was accepted by the trade union group between 2009 and 2013. There was no recommendation from an actuary to CIÉ to pay 3.6 times or 2.7 times. Accordingly, a review did not arise.