John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

In 2019, the UK Parliament found that the accountancy profession was giving misleading advice that was inconsistent with European law relative to the international financial reporting standards. That comes into play now in terms of those standards and the sale of AIB. Will the Minister ensure that when AIB is reporting its financial position to the potential shareholders, the information will align itself with the law and not with the current interpretation of the international financial reporting standards? This issue has cropped up from time to time as to how these standards are interpreted. I want to get the Minister's view on this relative to the AIB sale.

I have a final question that I hope the Minister will address. The State owns 71% of AIB. Recently in the courts, AIB and EBS settled a case with a tied agent. There is a confidentiality clause, I presume, attached to the outcome of that case and the settlement involved. Some 20 witnesses on the side of the tied agency were to come forward in that case. They would have had similar circumstances and experiences. If this court case had been heard and its outcome had been a successful one for the tied agents, it would have stood as a baseline for others to be tested against. That now cannot happen because of the confidentiality issue and because AIB and EBS have closed down and dealt with only one of the agents. However, there are many more agents. Is the Minister not concerned that, in informing stakeholders of legacy issues in particular, this matter will probably not even be referred to and, also, that there are, or were, tied agents who have still not had their grievance heard in an open way by EBS and AIB?

I have always endeavoured to try to get the banks to the point where they would at least mediate in some way. However, that has not happened. While the case did not come to trial, now that the sides have seen the case and have all their documentation and so on, does this not provide an opportunity to look at how this settlement was reached on the steps of the court, assess each individual case of the tied agents involved and come to some resolution? It has gone on and on.

The committee have raised this case with AIB, which insists that it represents EBS and will not let the principal people in EBS appear before us. I can partially understand that but I fully understand the side of the EBS tied agents. The public gallery was full of these agents at one of our meetings. Since then, their numbers have dropped because some members of the group have died. That is the way life is. However, for those who are left, surely something must be done? I am not asking the Minister, with the State's 71% shareholding, to influence the outcome. However, surely to God, as the main shareholder, the State should at least request the bank to be open and transparent about that legacy issue which is causing so much pain and grief for the people involved and their families. Now that the court case is finished, let us see if EBS will do it.