Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

I seek clarity from the Minister. Essentially this amendment extends the National Treasury Management Agency to become a form of bank to State bodies and Departments. I have no problem in principle with the NTMA so doing as it can achieve economies in providing, for example, foreign exchange services. However, does it raise a bigger issue if Members allow deposit-taking and lending facilities by the NTMA to bodies such as the HSE and so on? It seems to be a significant step forward. I presume the HSE has its own lines of credit, bridging finance and so on that it uses to manage its affairs. Has the Government decided it would be better to see the NTMA become more of a bank that offers active services to public service bodies, rather than my understanding of its original purpose, which was simply to manage public debt and achieve economies in that area?

I am aware of and welcome the development of other activities within the same group, such as the State Claims Agency and the National Pensions Reserve Fund, as economies of scale may be gained by having them managed under the same roof. However, is this a significant new departure on which the NTMA is embarking? What are the implications for wider public policy? Perhaps this is a wide and far-seeing measure. However, it seems strange for it to be slipped into this Bill as one amendment among 100 others. It seems to be a significant initiative in respect of public policy on banking by public bodies.

See this speech in context