Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)

The only merit I see in this recommendation is that it would delay the general election by a number of weeks. The recommendation is clearly not a money Bill recommendation. That has been clear since this morning. That is not a matter for the Chair in this House. The Ceann Comhairle would have to make a ruling on that in due course because he determines that particular issue by way of certificate. This Bill is certified to be a money Bill. Were it to go back to the other House and were it not to be so certified in the context of the consideration of this recommendation, then a committee of privileges would have to be established under the Constitution to determine the issue. This involves the President and the usual constitutional procedures. That would lead to a considerable delay.

It is very attractive. We are all against original sin. We are all against bonuses. I heard Senator Twomey mention the fact that we had been very tardy about this and that this was a problem with our public relations. We were not tardy about this at all. Within a few weeks of the guarantee being given, the necessary statutory orders were adopted in both Houses providing that no more bonuses could be paid. That has been the position in 2009 and 2010. I explained earlier today that any bonuses which had been paid had been paid on foot of retrospective vested rights that were already in existence. This recommendation seeks to find out all the information about them. Quite an amount of information has already been in the public domain and there is nothing to stop an Oireachtas committee probing further into that, as Senator Mullen outlined.

As shareholder of the two main banks, I have obtained an amount of information, although I must say that the process of eliciting that information can take time because there is quite an amount of it. The amount of information sought in this recommendation is absolutely extraordinary. Acceptance of this recommendation would mean that information would have to be provided concerning all employees of the credit institutions in respect of bonuses they may have received. This would cover staff from the low paid to directors, covering persons such as those working in call centres who largely rely on commission for their income. A enormous number of persons would be discovered in any disclosure. It would be an intrusion into the privacy of a great many of them, which would be fundamentally unfair, and there would be possible constitutional doubts about it. Given the scope of this exercise, I fail to see how it could be completed in three months. That is all I have to say about the recommendation at this stage.