Mr. David Hall:

Absolutely not. At the last count, it was 65 vulture fund visits versus five debtor advocacy visits to the Department of Finance. The vulture funds get the red carpet. It is quite bizarre. There are few other jurisdiction in the world where one is engaged in a procurement process to transact billions of euros that one will get direct access to those who control it. It is very odd in other procurement rules that one would be allowed to have access to people who have influence over significant share holdings and two big lenders.

It is a bizarre system. It is one that is both unique and unwelcome. I will temper my comments by saying that to be fair to them, those vulture funds have done nothing wrong. They are despicable, are a cancer in our society and should not be here because the banks should have been forced to resolve these issues themselves.

In relation to Mr. Burgess's point, he probably stopped himself at the appropriate time before he went over the cliff in respect of challenging the four people who came before this committee. Let us be very clear, that is the job of the committee. As regards those people who are looking in today and those people who had tracker mortgages, the tracker debacle and scandal, as it is appropriately called, is despicable. The banks obscured details and facts. We went from 3,000 to more than 34,000 individuals. That, in itself, speaks volumes. The work the committee has done and the appearance here of those four persons is of huge help. Let us be absolutely clear, however, this tracker issue was an issue about banks, not about the behaviour of a committee or anything else. Therein lies the undercurrent of the behaviour that we are seeing in other parts of the system over recent weeks in respect of covering things up and hiding things.