Mr. Brian Hayes:

Let me briefly respond to that. First, it was not a loan that we were proposing but an interim funding mechanism. It was all around trying to get money upfront for people to get their development going. We did that deliberately because once we start talking about a loan, we are immediately into credit assessment, which is the law. Regulations from Europe and domestically mean that we have to do a credit assessment of people but people will not get loans in that stressed environment. This is because of laws passed by these Houses and because of external regulations. The second reason we suggested that proposal is that there is a whole group of people who may be in credit servicing firms who would not get a loan either. We put forward that proposal last September, as the Deputy well knows. We walked him and his colleagues through it at the time. The purpose of the proposal was to get money to people upfront. We understand that the Department is now looking at this again and determining whether a portion of the grant could be upfront, possibly for professional fees. We need further clarity on that and I would appeal to the Department to sit down with the affected homeowners to see if we can get that situation resolved. If we are talking about loans, we are immediately into credit assessment and that has an impact on people's creditworthiness. Our dilemma there is that we are not in the position, as an industry group, to produce products or pricing because that is illegal. We cannot do that as a group. We have lenders out there, including credit unions-----