Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Undoubtedly, a constitutionally and legally robust accountability regime is something that has been absent for many years. There is consensus across the Oireachtas regarding the necessity of this legislation. It is a good thing and everybody recognises the accountability regime needs to be strong and robust for all the reasons we know. Our society and economy have paid the price due to the absence of regulation and individual accountability. Time and again, I have said it is the people who make decisions and not just corporate bodies. I imagine the decision the Minister took yesterday concerning variable pay rates and benefits, and the question of a cap in this regard, was undoubtedly informed by the evolution of this legislation and that we will, ultimately, have in the years to come a strong individual accountability framework in place. I am convinced yesterday's decision was informed by this development.

There has been much discussion in the media and these Houses about this question. Pointedly, as well, questions have been asked about whether the lifting of the variable pay and benefits restrictions up to €20,000 will be more beneficial, for example, to bank staff starting off on salaries of €26,000 annually in retail banks or to the senior management staff of those retail banks earning multiples of that amount. The Taoiseach was clear yesterday on his perspective in this regard. Frankly, I tend to agree with him that this legislation will ultimately be of greater benefit than the decision the Minister made yesterday to ordinary banking staff who are in a competitive situation.

Retail banks are losing staff hand over fist to competitor organisations that do not have the same constraints. These are people on moderate and modest incomes, who have been prevented from obtaining packages that are on offer elsewhere. This is particularly important in the context of the cost-of-living crisis.

I have two questions for the Minister about the Government's decision yesterday. Does he agree that the next step should be for the Financial Services Union, which is the key union representing retail banking staff, to come together and agree a framework and a mechanism for how ordinary bank staff could benefit from the announcement by the Minister yesterday? My next point is important. Does the Minister agree with me that it would be unimaginable and unconscionable for senior bank managers to benefit first from the changes announced by him yesterday before there was full agreement between the Financial Services Union and banks about the necessity for ordinary bank workers - people on low and modest incomes - to benefit from the decision he made yesterday?