Joe Carey (Clare, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Dorgan. I thank all of the delegates for coming. It is a very interesting topic and an issue that was raised initially by Deputy Ó Cuív. We have included it in the committee's work programme. We have had a private meeting to discuss it and are trying to pull everything together. We are also getting all of the stakeholders around the table. We have received apologies from the Banking and Payments Federation Ireland. Unfortunately, its representatives were unable to make it today. This is an initial step in public session in dealing with the matter.

I thank Mr. Connolly for giving us an insight into the workings of the bank and what actually goes on. We are dealing with the unknown - all of the hidden artefacts, items of interest, paintings, possibly gold bullion, money and so on. All of this stuff is stored away in the banks. The issue would involve trying to identify who owned the items and should be the beneficiary. As Mr. Dorgan said in his statement, they have been there for so long and it is the banks' job to keep them safe. There is no obligation on them to actually do anything with them. That is where we come in because there is a window of opportunity under the dormant accounts legislation which falls within the remit of the Department of Rural and Community Development. That is why the committee is taking on the issue. I thank Mr. Dorgan for his insight and pointing the committee in a direction that might lead away from that legislation, but it is an area we need to explore. We have a legal adviser with us today who has also presented to the committee previously. She is taking note of what is being said. As it is our intention to possibly publish legislation, from the start we want to get it right. That is why we invited the delegates.

I want to tease out some of the detail. The 15-year rule for dormant accounts means that if there are no transactions, an account is looked at and absorbed into the fund. Mr. Connolly has suggested a 100-year rule. What would be regarded as a reasonable timeframe within which the State could possibly benefit from the proceeds, be they money or historical artefacts which could be sold and the value realised? The State and community development activities in various areas could benefit. What would Mr. Dorgan regard as a reasonable timeframe? In California the rule is that when safety deposit boxes are abandoned, the banks move within a three-year period. Perhaps that is a bit too quick, but what is Mr. Dorgan's view?

Cost is another big consideration. Mr. Dorgan has outlined the pitfalls in that regard in terms of who would pay. We need to get the banking representative group to the table to seek its views. There are significant cost and legal questions about ownership and title. The GDPR is a new consideration in the mix.

Perhaps Mr. Dorgan might address these questions.