Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I have no doubt they have been and they are people of the highest quality and with the intellectual power to back that up. That said, there needs to be an oversight body for banking. We have an oversight body for accountancy and other matters. If we had an oversight body for banking, what would it do? There would be basic uniformity of standards which they would have to apply and conform to, and it would be checked and tested annually. Any changes in governance or association rules would have to be cleared at some level.

People may think this is over-regulation and ask if it will be another quango? Most of the latest quangos set up in the past ten years are self-financing. I am a member of two semi-state bodies, the Personal Injuries Assessment Board and the Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority. They are fully or partly self-funded. If we set up a bank oversight body, it should be paid for by the banks. My proposal should not cost the State money.

This can be done and it works in other places. We have seen failure in the US. The Securities and Exchange Commission in the US does not work, nor does the Serbanes-Oxley Act. In the US everything works on the basis of rules. There is no rule to cover every situation. We need to apply principles and have people of quality, trust, confidence and intellectual capacity to examine what is being done, check it, look under stones to see what is going on and ensure we take control of the situation.

There is a lot to be done and a lot can be done. It must be done quickly, however. I understand the regulator brought the matter to the attention of the bank immediately, indicated it was not illegal but was unacceptable practice and on that basis it was declared to the auditors this year. I do not know why it was delayed; perhaps the person involved refused to resign. It is not difficult to work out the possible and probable scenarios. We can discuss the matter again.

I want the Minister to take firm action on some of the issues I raised to give confidence to ordinary people. He has given confidence on the basis of the deposit guarantee scheme, which has been very important in creating stability. He also created additional liquidity. He is now discussing recapitalisation. I have asked him privately and publicly six times to show me the connection between recapitalisation and loans. He cannot do it and neither can anyone else.

I have a difficulty in giving money unless I know it will come out the other end, so to speak. I believe it would be better to buy the cheapest bank, and one is going cheap this morning. The Minister can then do what he wishes with his €10 billion. He can then run the bank, make it available to people under proper, old fashioned banking standards and lend on that basis.

Much can be done and I recognise that we need to get rid of the perks and million euro salaries for directors. Action is needed on those issues and the Minister should say what he has been reluctant to say previously but has been thinking. These matters need to be in the public arena to show people the Minister is in control, we will not stand for this carry-on and the banks will toe the line and come down to our planet. They must be beamed down to earth, as it were.