Mr. Declan Carlyle:

In respect of 2009, I have only briefly looked at the document. I would be familiar from the comments Mr. Ennis made and from the contents that it was a position paper on the possibility that if there was a recommendation of 3.6 times and 2.7 times, and if CIÉ did not contribute to that level, there would be a legal difficulty. I accept that. The statutory instruments require CIÉ to contribute to that level. Thereafter, a review would take place. No actuary's recommendation ultimately followed that position paper that required CIÉ to pay in excess of 2.8 times, which it has done. It is not explosive. It did not contravene the statutory instruments signed and in place since 2000 which reflected the 1994 agreement.