Mr. Gabriel Makhlouf:

The two questions are related. I do not, as a matter of generality, think that 100% Government guarantees are a good thing. It is more important - again as a matter of generality although it could be different in particular circumstances - that the banks have skin in the game because credit institutions such as banks and credit unions have a better understanding and knowledge of their customer. Their business is to assess commercial risk and to understand the viability of a business proposition. If they feel there is no risk in their lending because the Government is covering it by 100%, they are probably less likely to apply the rigour that one would like them to apply. I think one should use the banks as part of a suite of measures to provide liquidity, partly because it gives flexibility and partly because they have that skill set. The Revenue Commissioners have the tools to collect money from a taxpayer or to give money back to a taxpayer. Their skill set is not in assessing the commercial viability of a loan so, in my view, it all depends on what exactly one is trying to achieve. If one is trying to deliver some cash directly to a business, the Revenue Commissioners may be a very good way of doing it. If one is trying to get value for money out of a commitment by the State, then a credit institution has a role to play and one has to think about the incentives one builds around it to make sure it plays that role.