Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Finance if he will provide in tabular form, with respect to Bank of Ireland, the number of staff whose annual salary at 31 December 2011 fell into bands of €400,000 and above, between €300,000 to €399,999, between €200,000 to €299,999 and between €150,000 to €199,000. [50513/12]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Bank of Ireland has provided me with the following information on annual salaries as at 31 March 2012.

I have responded to similar requests by way of parliamentary question for the other covered institutions today and recently. The Government shares the outrage of the public concerning these levels of remuneration. It must be acknowledged that without the assistance of citizens, such levels of remuneration at these institutions would only be aspirational. There are constitutional and legal issues to be considered when dealing with these pay and pension issues, but the Government will explore any avenues and options to address this, subject to the necessary legal constraints and our obligation to protect taxpayers' interests in the banking sector.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is public outcry about bankers' remuneration and salary packages. The Minister has stated that the new appointment that was made was within the salary cap, so the appointee is getting only €500,000. It is time to wake up. This country is broke and the Minister cannot afford to pay someone a basic salary of €500,000 out of taxpayers’ money. That is simply not acceptable. The country is broke and the Minister will ask people within three weeks to take more pain, despite the fact that they did not cause the crisis, yet somehow he justifies bankers’ receiving pay packets of €500,000 under his watch.

I agree with the Minister that many of the bankers discussed in the media and in this House were awarded contracts by the previous Government, but when the information became known under the Fianna Fáil-led Government the Minister called on it to introduce emergency legislation. The late Brian Lenihan, God rest him, sat in the chair where the Minister is sitting and said that he could not do so because of constitutional barriers. The Government has introduced pension reductions for public sector workers up to a value of 20%. Has that been passed on to bankers? The Minister has not written to Irish Life or the other institutions asking them to forgo 15%. Will he tackle this issue? The outcry from the Government is fake. This has been ongoing for a year and a half, and if it were not for the fact that questions were tabled to elicit this information we would not have heard the comments made today by the Minister or previously by the Tánaiste, Deputy Gilmore. This is a fake outcry. It is to do with a report. The Minister is satisfied with the situation because he is still granting packages of €500,000 today.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are out of time. I call on the Minister to reply.

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The levels of salary and pension applying to certain bankers are outrageous. It is not true to say that we are only reacting now because there is a public outcry. For example, I wrote to the chairman of IBRC some time ago asking him to get his board to impose a 15% pay cut on all staff. I also appointed Mercer last June to examine pay levels right across the banking institutions. I did so precisely because of the outcry. My officials are in regular contact with the banks. The new chief executive of AIB, David Duffy, has taken on board the views expressed and has imposed, by agreement, pay cuts on staff at many levels. He is also proceeding with a large redundancy package. Those who work in banks are not beneficiaries of public service pensions; therefore, laws designed to cut or place levies on public service pensions are not applicable to banks. For residual reasons, everyone is aware, as I am sure the Deputy is, that the Constitution has strong property rights enshrined in it. The legal advice, which has been tested in court, is that a pension is a property right and taking someone’s pension or a disproportionate amount of it away is akin to taking someone’s land or part of it away. That is the difficulty, but I am proceeding on one basis with IBRC and I am proceeding with the other covered banks. I will act when I receive the Mercer report at the end of the year.

What the Deputy is doing in the House is beneficial to my position, because many decent people who have retired from those institutions have seen that the crash has resulted in changed circumstances and are subject to moral persuasion. Week after week, people right across the public service are yielding up parts of their emoluments to the State. I know this because I have to sign the acceptance order when the money is given to the Exchequer. On the initiative of Mr. Duffy, who wrote to all of his high-profile pensioners and asked them to make a contribution, at least one positive reply was received and a significant contribution has been made. I would like the message to go out from this House that such remuneration is not acceptable as far as we are concerned, but it was a different country when the payments were negotiated. Now there are families struggling to survive on very little and it is an obscenity that people who participated in the destruction of the economy are beneficiaries of huge pensions. It is not good enough.