Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 May 1998

Vol. 491 No. 3

Written Answers. - National Irish Bank.

Pat Rabbitte

Question:

51 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the progress, if any, made to date by the authorised officer appointed under section 59 of the Insurance Act, 1989, and the inspectors appointed by the High Court under the Companies Act, 1990, to carry out investigations into the affairs of National Irish Bank; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12060/98]

Jack Wall

Question:

73 Mr. Wall asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the length of time the investigation into the National Irish Bank will take; the cost incurred to date in this regard; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12132/98]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 51 and 73 together.

On 23 March 1998, Mr. Martin Cosgrove was appointed authorised officer under section 59 of the Insurance Act, 1989, to establish the extent to which the operations of National Irish Bank Ltd. and its associated companies complied with the provisions of the Insurance Acts and associated regulations. Mr. Cosgrave will submit an interim report within the next ten days. I will consider this report in conjunction with my legal advisers. Mr. Cosgrove is an officer of my Department and there are no costs associated with his inquiry other than normal departmental salary and overhead costs.

On 30 March 1998 at my request, Mr. John Blayney and Mr. Tom Grace were appointed by the High Court as inspectors to National Irish Bank Ltd. under secton 8 of the Companies Act, 1990. The court ordered the inspectors to produce an interim report to it by 22 June next. I understand that shortly after the appointment, they sought the co-operation of National Irish Bank Ltd., and I am aware that the inspectors have since advertised in the media seeking information from the public which might be of assistance to their inquiries. As the reporting relationship of the inspectors is to the High Court, I have no other information on the progress of their investigation or on the length of time which it might take. I expect, however, that the inspectors' interim report will deal with these issues, and it is my intention to be represented at the High Court hearing on 29 June which will consider their report.
Under section 13 of the Companies Act, 1990, the cost of a section 8 investigation is borne initially by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. However, my Department is aware that the inspectors' fees for their first month of work amounted to £54,102.15. There are provisions in section 13 for the court to direct that body corporates dealt with in section 8 reports repay the Minister.
Top
Share