Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I understand the motivation for the amendment. When added to all the other legislation that has been put in place, it may be a top-heavy procedure to deal with what should be fairly straightforward questions at this time. The reality is that the Minister failed to carry out any due diligence of the banks before he provided the State guarantee. He failed to carry out any due diligence before he put forward his proposals on capitalisation. It seems now that no due diligence has been carried out before the nationalisation of this bank. We are not getting anything like the full picture in regard to the financial state and value of the assets which the Minister has now taken on board on behalf of the taxpayers of this country. I understand perfectly from where the motivation for this amendment comes.

The Minister said tonight he had used the term "disappointing" back in September when it was revealed by Anglo Irish Bank that its then chairman had these extraordinary loans and other directors had significant loans. He said he used the term because he did not want his statements to have any effect on the market. I find that very disingenuous. It is a post hoc rationalisation of a flawed statement given that the markets judged his inaction as very detrimental to the banking system, and neither the Minister, the Government, the Financial Regulator nor the directors of the bank could see the difference between right and wrong.

The letter from Anglo Irish Bank announcing resignations on 19 December stated that the transfer of loans did not breach banking or legal regulations. I question the signal that went out when no action was taken and no significant statement was made by the Minister condemning this, expressing serious disapproval or stating that the full armoury of the law would be brought to bear. Now, when he announces the nationalisation, the entire blame for the financial and banking catastrophe is laid at the door of one man when, in fact, it is due to the complacency of the Minister and the Government in the entire sequence of events which has taken place in the past number of months.

What is the security in respect of these loans to directors and senior staff in Anglo Irish Bank? Are they secured on reliable assets? Is there evidence of the recipients of those loans having incurred serious losses to date? Is there any evidence of the recipients of these loans absconding from the jurisdiction to avoid meeting their liabilities? What are the implications of these specific loans for the taxpayer? If the Minister could answer even that question, we might have a little more confidence in his decisions and in the legislation he is putting before the House.