Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 23 February 2021
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach
Banking Matters: Discussion
John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source
I wish to add a few more questions to the list. Goldman Sachs apparently had a role in this decision. What were the terms of reference given to Goldman Sachs? What was it asked to investigate? What was its role? Is it too late to reverse this decision? Do the witnesses think the decision was the correct one? Do they have a view on it? Do they have a view on the work undertaken by Goldman Sachs?
I wish to turn now to the meeting with the Minister for Finance in October 2020 and the meeting between Howard Davies of NatWest and the Minister on 17 December. At each of those meetings, the importance of the staff and of the bank to the Irish economy was stressed by the Minister. The decision that has been made is an appalling one that will have wide-ranging effects on the Irish economy and the SME sector. The next steps that Ulster Bank takes will decide the future of many businesses in this country. Therefore, the Government should have been far more vigilant. I would like to have further engagement with the witnesses on those next steps and how the bank is going to deal with these matters. What is the nature of the understanding with AIB? I note that it is a non-binding understanding; likewise with Permanent TSB. What does the bank intend to do about its difficult loans? Will it enter into discussions with the likes of iCare Housing or Home For Life? Will it enter into discussions with those that are broadly accepted as ethical funds? When I say "ethical funds" I do not use the same definition as AIB because it dealt with a fund recently that is far from ethical. What plans have been advanced to deal with distressed loans in Ulster Bank? In the last few weeks we have received emails from customers of the bank about home possessions. The legal firm representing the bank has been contacting various customers.
Some of those customers are elderly and others are sick. Some of them believed they already had an engagement with the bank and an agreement in terms of how they were dealing with their distressed loan or mortgage. Indeed, one of the customers committed suicide and that has to be taken into account. We are talking about mental health here; not only the mental health of staff, but the mental health of customers with whom the bank is dealing. There is no doubt that the actions of the bank have caused further difficulty for some customers. What does the bank do with that cohort of people? It has managed to speak to AIB and PTSB. I hope it has reached out to the ethical funds that would assist in the restructuring of these loans to allow people to get on with their lives.
An article written by Brian Carey and Niall Brady was published in The Sunday Timeslast week. Its description of how Ms Howard was treated at the most recent meeting of the committee which she attended was interesting. The journalists suggested that the behaviour of the committee and the rough discourse of the parliamentary engagement may have contributed to the wind-down of Ulster Bank. I would like Ms Howard to call out that nonsense. The committee was doing its job and defending the bank's customers and staff at that stage.
My next question relates to Ulster Bank and the properties. The bank owns various branches around the country. Does it actually own the properties or is it leasing them? How are they to be offloaded?
I ask Ms Howard to comment on the issue of commercial mortgages. I understand that, according to the Central Bank, they are included in the tracker scheme. If that is a fact, enforcement proceedings should not commence in respect of those loans. I ask for an update on the general process of legal proceedings within the bank. Will those enforcement proceedings for commercial trackers be stopped? How will the bank engage with that cohort of customers? How will it deal with the legal cases currently under way against the bank, of which there are several? How will that be dealt with? Will it be dealt with by NatWest or by some other part of the organisation?
On the issue of vulture funds, when Ulster Bank sold various loans to vulture funds in the past, was the bank paid hard cash for those loans or does it have an ongoing benefit from the process in terms of a share of profits or whatever arrangement that might be? The committee needs to hear from Ms Howard on that issue because of the numbers now involved.
I call Ms Howard to field those questions. Any member of her team may answer the questions. I ask that the answers be delivered as precisely as the questions were delivered.
No comments