Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)

I welcome the opportunity to address this motion. There has been much comment about the guarantee scheme in the past year, much of it negative and much of it ill-informed. There has been little by way of alternative solutions to the problem that existed, and still exists, by way of coming forward with a solution to the banking problem.

There has been considerable focus by some in the Opposition on the cost of recapitalisation of the banks in the context of the guarantee scheme. A cloak has been wrapped around the cost of the recapitalisation to somehow create an impression that the sizeable cost was somehow a factor or a fault of the existence of the guarantee. Suggestions have been made that had no guarantee been put in place the market would have resolved the position and that all would be fine by now. That is a fallacy with which we all have to deal.

I listened to Deputy Noonan's balanced contribution. Unfortunately, others within Fine Gael have not been quite so balanced in the past year. However, he concentrated a good deal on whether the Minister was aware of the solvency crisis as opposed to the liquidity issue on the night the scheme was first introduced. Deputy O'Donnell continued that theme. The fact remains that it would not have mattered a hat of crabs because the effect would have been the same. The banks were on the verge of collapse and to allow any of them to go under would have had greater repercussions than we have experienced to date. It is clear, therefore, that there was a necessity to put the guarantee in place.

See this speech in context