Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The main relevant article in the Bill is Article 3, which states the purpose of the Bill. It refers to the purpose being "to mobilise funding and provide stability support under strict conditionality, appropriate to the financial assistance instrument chosen, to the benefit of ESM Members which are experiencing, or are threatened by, severe financing problems, if indispensable to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area as a whole and of its Member States". My question is in the context of retrospective or retroactive recapitalisation, which is the key possibility for Ireland under this legislation. Ireland probably does not meet those criteria at present but at the time when the banks were recapitalised when the crash happened, it certainly would. In a follow-on question, could one have a combination of launching or selling the banks with private investors, as well as ESM investment? Obviously, the objective of the Government is to get back for the taxpayers the money that has been invested. As for IBRC, by the time it was liquidated, €32 billion of taxpayers' money had been fried and the damage was done. Is there a question of the ESM possibly taking a minority shareholding in a bank? In such circumstances, one could have a board that would not be dominated by the ESM. Is the mechanism sufficiently fluid and flexible whereby one could have a suite of options including going to the market, the Irish public buying shares and using the ESM in such a way that the taxpayers could get all their money back as quickly as possible, while also being cognisant of the goal of getting the best return for the taxpayers? I ask within the context of Article 3 and the fact that Ireland met those criteria at that moment in time when the banks were recapitalised.