Professor Philip Lane:

Let me make a few points. I do not really want to talk about that individual case. I understand there is still an ongoing case in front of the Workplace Relations Commission. Let me provide as much reassurance as I can. When I heard about this matter before Christmas, we did examine it. Internal audit is a vital function. The first point is that the Central Bank - in line with many other corporate areas that any organisation will have - is investing quite a bit to expand its internal audit team. In this period of reform, reorganisation and improvement, we have no reason to not take on board any suggestions coming from the internal audit process. This year, routinely, there will be 14 internal audits. The process is there in order for the bank to learn from any shortcomings.

This matter relates to an internal audit on governance.

All of the issues identified in the internal audit were about how the Central Bank organises itself and whether the process of governance adheres to what it should be. It identified several issues. The implementation of the identified recommendations is virtually complete. In terms of substance, the process worked, the internal audit was done and the recommendations have been taken on board. In terms of how the internal audit was handled, of course when an allegation is made and given that it is an internal audit, this was handed over to an external firm to assess how it was handled. That external firm concluded that the bank had a reasonable process to deal with that internal audit. Going beyond that, the individual and the bank are engaged at the Workplace Relations Commission and I do not want to get into the individual issues. This is not the right forum to deal in too much detail with the allegations and the risks the Deputy identified.