Ms Noreen Byrne:

Yes. The special resolution involves two meetings of the membership. One can also proceed by way of board resolution. In practice to date, board resolution has been used. This is allowed for in the Act in circumstances where it is expedient to merge two credit unions in a crisis. It is deemed expedient. It is interesting that almost all transfers of engagements to date have been by board resolution, without a membership vote.

My issue concerns the definition of "expedience". The push has not been from the Central Bank but from the credit unions themselves. The Central Bank and the league have facilitated it. Does expedience pertain to an exception or convenience? If it is a matter of convenience, it becomes the norm rather than the exception. This may be useful in the shorter term because it is more efficient but, in the longer term, one is going down a slippery road. This would never happen in the agricultural co-operative sector. It is unusual that it is happening here.

The change suggested in respect of the special resolution is that, instead of having two meetings, there should be one. Instead of having an information session and a voting session, the two are to be combined. In the short term, this increases the efficiency of the whole process but it is not desirable in the longer term, especially if there is a provision included in the legislation. Having an information and voting session at the one meeting is not really appropriate. One is led to believe the sky is falling down and that one needs to vote immediately.