Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ulster Bank management for coming before the committee. They should not feel aggrieved. This is not a personal issue; it is something that concerns banking facilities in the country. We appreciate that some of the witnesses may themselves be negatively affected by the proposals as well. We appreciate also that 40 or so people were identified as being redundant from the start and we sympathise.

I know sympathy is not a great deal of benefit to anybody but let it be restated that we, the humble representatives of the people, have two gripes, for want of a better description. The first concerns the reluctance of NatWest and Ulster Bank to speak to this committee beforehand. This is something that could easily have been done. Even if it was only a public relations exercise, it would have been an indication that they were human, concerned and willing to meet the representatives of the people in order to reassure them, but that was not the intention.

I raised the notion of a "phased" and "orderly" withdrawal with the unions earlier. I do not believe there is such a thing. I believe the intention is much more harsh than that and I am concerned about it. It will create serious problems for industry, for banking and for a resolution of this particular issue. If possible, I want to identify the witnesses' interpretation of a phased, orderly withdrawal. I am not so sure that is possible or even intended. I ask that there be no progression of branch closures during the Covid pandemic, which is both a health and economic crisis. We can ill afford to have to deal with yet another problem at this time.

The Central Bank has been raised on a number of occasions. This committee met representatives of the Central Bank which seemed to be, like us, unable to engage resolutely with NatWest or Ulster Bank in terms of identifying how best to transfer. A lot of my constituents are customers of Ulster Bank. There is a huge network of branches across my constituency. From the east coast of Ireland, through the centre of the country and across to the west coast, Ulster Bank has a significant presence and there is enormous dependency on it. Where is that business going to go now? My worst fear is that the business will be broken up under various headings, some of which will be saleable and some not. It may be possible to create a third banking force within the country which, in turn, will be able to carry on business in the same way that Ulster Bank did in the past.

Finally, I wish to refer to the administrative changes taking place and the move towards centralisation. This situation may well be seen by the other pillar banks as an opportunity for increased emphasis on centralisation, with everybody moving to a national hub and speaking from there, out to the people. That would be a bad decision in my view. Withdrawing from the people from whom the banks gain their profits is not a good thing to do. It is highly suspect and I would have a strong objection to it. Perhaps an orderly, phased withdrawal will result in an attempt to make an alternative banking system available to the people who were previously served by Ulster Bank. The same provision should also apply to the staff of Ulster Bank who have faithfully discharged their duties in this country and will continue to do so in an any entity that is found to be fair.