Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

I want to raise some questions regarding the merger legislation. I cannot understand how the Minister would want to override competition law where circumstances arise, where perhaps a consolidation is occurring that is in the interest of the financial system's stability. What is not clear is why the Minister is not making provision for some role for the Dáil in such an event. A merger of that nature would be a considerable and momentous event. Most likely, the situation would entail the State taking on some part of the liabilities. In some of the consolidations in other countries, the state had to take on some responsibility for non-performing assets to attract another institution to take up the role envisaged for them.

It is possible that the consolidations, mergers and acquisitions that would occur here would have considerable implications for public policy as well as for the competition dimension. There must be some relationship to the Dáil. For example, at no point whether in issuing a certificate or in consulting on notification does there seem to be a more public opportunity to consider the action taken under these provisions. Since they are so particular and the powers have been taken in a situation in which the Minister will certify that the financial stability is in jeopardy, there must be an opportunity for a wider debate here. It would be unthinkable not to have a debate in those circumstances. While I accept the necessity for this section, will the Minister indicate whether there is scope for a role for the Dáil?

On section 8, will the Minister outline what he envisages the role of the National Treasury Management Agency to be in these circumstances? In the normal course of events, the NTMA has purchased securitised mortgages as a simply commercial arrangement presumably, on behalf of the pensions reserve board. Given that it already plays a role in taking up securitised mortgages, it would be worthwhile for the Minister to outline to the House the role he envisages for the NTMA. Will that role be protected in the same way as the Minister's role? He will have detailed powers of supervision, but will they continue to be exercised when practical operations have moved elsewhere? Will there be joined up thinking and operation when that occurs?

See this speech in context