Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I have been critical in regard to the decision in terms of the reduction in the banking levy. We know how the banking levy was introduced and how it is calculated in terms of reference points in regard to the amount of DIRT that is paid. However it was calculated in such a way that it would accrue €150 million. Two banks are now withdrawing from the Irish market. That is an unfortunate situation. I heard today that one of the banks is preparing to lay off hundreds of employees. The number of people I heard mentioned was 500. Our concerns and thoughts are with them. However the key thing here from a bank’s point of view is that while deposit accounts have been closed in those banks, and we can see from the beginning of this year until the end of October 2022, some 222,000 household deposit accounts have closed either in Ulster Bank or KBC with a similar amount, 212,000 opened with the remaining financial institutions.

The point I am making here is that the banks are withdrawing. They are leaving the State but their assets, in terms of loans, are going to other financial institutions. The deposits are going into other financial institutions. These banks will increase their profitability because they are now larger in scale and have a larger proportion of the market. Therefore, there is a strong argument that the banking levy should remain at least at €150 million. It is my view that it is probably the most appropriate, if we are talking about levies, to assist in terms of the defects caused by mica and pyrrhotite.

The banks will have many of their assets restored on their balance sheets. They have mortgages out against homes, in my county and elsewhere, that are valueless today. Those homes are really sites. Given the demolition of what is on them, they do not really have a value but, through the scheme through taxpayers' investment, the banks will have those assets restored on their balance sheets. Therefore, it would be appropriate to restore the banking levy to the level it was. That would be an appropriate mechanism to help part-finance the remediation works that have to take place over a sustained period of time in terms of defects.