JOINT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE debate -
Wednesday, 11 May 2005

Draft Interim Report on Bank Charges: Presentation.

Chairman

A revised draft interim report on bank charges and interest rates has been prepared. I ask the consultant, Mr. James Dorgan, to take his seat while I run through the preliminaries. If it is possible I suggest we agree the report and release it today, as we are making it clear that since we commenced our work a number of new issues have arisen which will be dealt with as part of our work programme. Few amendments have been proposed since we met on 16 March. Dáil procedures require this goes through section by section before we sign it off.

I welcome Mr. Dorgan to the meeting and advise him that while committee members are covered by parliamentary privilege, visitors are not so protected. As indicated at our last meeting, we will consider the report today, and hear a short presentation from Mr. Dorgan on the revised version of the report as few changes have occurred. I hope this draft is considered to be the final interim report to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. It will then be sent to the Competition Authority and IFSRA. If other relevant items arise we will include them in a further report of the committee but it is important that this interim report be concluded. I ask Mr. Dorgan to speak on the significant changes made since our last meeting.

Mr. Jim Dorgan

I thank the Chairman but would disagree with him as there are quite a number of changes and some of them are relatively significant and were inserted as my best interpretation of the wishes of the committee.

Sections 2 and 3 provide background, and I note in passing that the review of past developments has been extended to include the Bank of Ireland and payment protection policies. Text in the previous report, which it is proposed to delete, has been struck through and proposed new text is underlined. Paragraph 4.46 in the section on examination of witnesses deals with our view on Cork County Council's banking services. Members will recall an episode occurred that caused concern. Deputy Ó Caoláin proposed a wording for our conclusion on this, and the Chairman suggested the additional text included at the end of the paragraph. Members might agree my formulation was mild and the proposed wording reflects a stiffer view of the committee:

The Joint Committee considers this episode to be a shocking example of what can happen when there is a real lack of competition. The Joint Committee considers it all the more to be criticised because of the loss of public money which is likely to be involved.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

What page is that?

Chairman

That is on page 18.

Mr. Dorgan

Will we deal with these items as we go through the draft report?

Chairman

We will deal with them as we go through it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I wish to raise some points on that.

Chairman

We will finish with the amendments that are listed. I will be guided by the committee——

Deputy Ó Caoláin

The Chair must guide us.

Chairman

I would prefer to formally go through it page by page, and then clear the report at the end. It is the most logical way to do it as otherwise we will go forwards and backwards to topics.

Deputy Bruton

I do not want to be awkward but we could start by going through the recommendations and then go back to the earlier text. If we resolve what our recommendations are the earlier text will fall into place. If we go back we will be chopping and changing all over the place.

Chairman

Our conclusions and recommendations are contained on pages 19 and 20.

Mr. Dorgan

The relevant paragraph is 4.46.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Let me address that issue. I welcome Mr. Dorgan's expansion on the point raised at the last committee meeting. However, the last sentence merits revisiting. The first suggested replacement sentence reads as follows: "The joint committee considered this episode to be a shocking example of what can happen when there is a real lack of competition". I have no difficulty with that sentence as it reflects the views of the committee. The second replacement sentence reads: "The joint committee considers it to be all the more to be criticised [a complex way to put it] because of the loss of public money which is likely to be involved". I propose that the second sentence be deleted and replaced with the following: "The joint committee believes the banks acted in a cartel fashion and to the detriment of a public body". That last point is very important because the issue centres on the use of public money. My proposed sentence reflects the situation as we found it.

Chairman

I have a problem with the use of the word "cartel". If the joint committee asserts that there was a cartel in operation, it will be suggesting criminal activity.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I suggested the words "acted in a cartel fashion".

Chairman

I am worried about the use of the word "cartel" because it would suggest criminal activity. As members of an Oireachtas committee, we are not in a position to make such a statement. Would the Deputy replace the word "cartel" with an alternative?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I do not agree with that suggestion.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

If it is the case that we must evade the issue in order to arrive at conclusions——

Chairman

Does the Deputy understand the point I made?

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I understand the Chairman's point——

Chairman

We did not prove a cartel was in operation.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Charges would be appropriate in connection with some aspects of banking practice.

Chairman

The joint committee is not a prosecuting body.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

The Chairman is correct. It is up to others to interpret the views of the joint committee and act accordingly. The committee is not the Director of Public Prosecutions.

I would be prepared to accept the following sentence, "The joint committee believes the banks acted in an unacceptable fashion and to the detriment of a public body", if that would address the Chairman's difficulties. The critical part of the sentence is "to the detriment of a public body". It is a very serious matter which warrants emphasis.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

Mr. Dermot Bradley of Permanent TSB stated very clearly that the bank could not provide the services specified and should never have entered the bidding process. It has done well out of this. We are exaggerating the issue to create competition in the banking sector but there is already competition in the sector. Cork County Council is one of the biggest in the country. Perhaps the computer system in Permanent TSB was simply incapable of handling the large volume of transactions conducted by the council.

Chairman

What wording would the Deputy propose for inclusion in page 18, in lieu of what is included?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I see no indication of a cartel. A competitive tendering process was initiated.

Chairman

I suggest to the Deputy that a very large public body asked the banks to provide competition but only one quoted for its business. It is remarkable that, when a body such as the local authority in County Cork requested a banking service, no alternative service provider made a bid.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I served with Cork County Council and it was always very competitive. As the banking institution in place has cut costs to the bone, other banks simply would not be in a position to bid against it. The tendering system is very tight. A Cork-based bank is looking after the local authority.

Deputy Burton

I suggest that the joint committee state that it wants the Competition Authority to examine the episode to determine if it represents an example of cartel-like activity. As the authority has a range of investigative powers, we should recommend that it examine the episode because it represents an instance of a lack of competition. That would allow the committee to sidestep the legal issues which may arise from the use of the word "cartel".

Chairman

That is a possible solution. The Competition Authority may decide that there was cartel-like behaviour. The joint committee does not have the resources to carry out an exhaustive investigation. However, we can highlight the issue and assert that it requires further examination.

Senator Mansergh

Deputy Burton's suggestion is a good one. As members of an investigating committee, we should not be fudging issues but at the same time we must be certain that what we say is backed up by facts. It seems to be, prima facie, disturbing and that is what the committee is proposing to state in its report. Deputy Burton’s suggestion would give it a way out of any legal difficulties while still advancing the issue by calling on a statutory body to carry out further investigations.

Deputy Burton

The Competition Authority is examining the banking sector in a rolling report.

Chairman

Do we have agreement on a replacement for the last sentence?

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I tried to accommodate the Chairman's difficulty by suggesting the following: "The joint committee believes the banks acted in an unacceptable fashion, to the detriment of a public body".

Chairman

Deputy O'Keeffe does not agree with that suggestion.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I do not agree with it. I wish to criticise the Competition Authority because I do not see it doing anything. All it wants to do is get bigger and bigger. I am a member of the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business which is in favour of everything the authority does. The authority suggests more competition and the introduction of another banking system. I believe it is aligned to a particular political party.

Senator Mansergh

The Competition Authority is a statutory body established by the Oireachtas and, as far as I am aware, has the full confidence of the Government. I do not think the joint committee can operate on the basis that it has no confidence in the authority. Members are entitled to take a critical view if they so wish but I do not think the committee should state, a priori, that the authority is incapable of doing its job. That would place it in a very false position.

Deputy Bruton

We could state the actions of the banks gave rise to the impression of collusion, without actually drawing that conclusion definitively. The Competition Authority should investigate. While the jury is still out on whether the banks behaved in a despicable manner, the impression given to the public was one of collusion.

Chairman

Deputy Bruton wishes to ask the Competition Authority to investigate the matter. Is that agreed?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I express my dissent on this issue. I have no confidence in the authority.

Chairman

I do not know the parliamentary rules in this matter. I propose that we record consensus noting Deputy O'Keeffe's dissent.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Can we reflect in whatever formula is arrived at the words "to the detriment of a public body"? There was no variance on this important point. I am open on the wording to allow the joint committee to proceed. Mr. Dorgan might co-operate with the Chairman to reflect the spirit of members' remarks as well as our colleague's dissension on the matter.

Chairman

That is fair. We will move on to page 19.

Mr. Dorgan

I wrote in the original draft of paragraph 5.2, perhaps venturing further than I was entitled, that the joint committee viewed competition as the best means to promote efficiency and high standards. As this had not been endorsed in it discussions, I removed the sentence in order that the paragraph now reads: "The joint committee believes that, at the moment, the structure of banking in Ireland is relatively highly concentrated." The ensuing text remains as before. Members have presumably seen the note from the Irish Bankers' Federation contesting this point of view and arguing that banks in Ireland are not highly concentrated.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

It would do so.

Chairman

We are on page 20.

Mr. Dorgan

I recorded as best I could the various proposals made by members. The original draft contained a request that IFSRA generate more information on interest rate margins in Ireland and make comparisons with other countries. This is contained in the underlined section at the end of paragraph 5.5. All recommendations, whether original or new, are in bold while new recommendations are underlined. Deputy Bruton suggested that bank borrowers be notified, not only of changes in interest rates, as required in the code of practice proposed by IFSRA, but also of changes in interest rate margins in order that they may determine the relative profitability of loans.

Deputy Bruton

While IFSRA might not accept this, it should be a requirement. Evidence indicated that, despite lower interest rates, margins had expanded on loans to vulnerable personal and small business borrowers. The full amount was not passed on.

Mr. Dorgan

It is to be made mandatory.

Deputy Bruton

That is our recommendation and we should not mince our words.

I wish to make further comments on interest rates. Reference should be made to the practice in the United Kingdom of paying interest on current accounts. While we might not recommend the practice, we should draw attention to developments in our nearest neighbour. Should we consider the displaying of interest rates to increase visibility? While IFSRA compares prices, the prices displayed in pubs allow customers the advantage of being able to shop around. It will be said many financial packages are too complex to do this but despite alcopops often being complex products, their prices are displayed.

Some financial institutions have used the practice of captive selling to bundle products so as to sell unnecessary mortgage protection insurance in addition to charging interest. Should we suggest a code of practice on captive selling and unnecessary bundling? This matter arose from events in the Bank of Ireland.

Mr. Dorgan

Paragraph 5.13 specifically refers to that issue.

Chairman

It has been included as an amendment which will be discussed later.

Deputy Burton

With regard to an earlier paragraph, the Financial Services Ombudsman has taken up duty since we commenced our deliberations. I am unsure whether he has decided on his role but he should be encouraged to investigate such cases as are outlined in paragraph 5.6 on the differentiation of loan products. However, this might not be appropriate.

At our last meeting I remarked that I considered the advertising on television and through direct mail of remortgaging to be a real problem. Tax bills have been paid through mortgages on houses which were almost paid off. Horrendous costs are involved in this service which is advertised in the afternoon on television by well known entertainment personalities. I am often critical of Irish standing banks but the products to which I refer involve unregistered lending and other agencies which offer, apparently, attractive packages. If a sum of €30,000 remains to repaid on a house, it sounds attractive to borrow €60,000 to pay off the debt and buy a new car. It is a crazy and expensive form of credit and effectively a type of money-lending. I have spoken to the regulator on this issue. At our last meeting I raised the Chesterton case and the issue of unregistered or not fully registered entities, of which about five exist. Should we make a comment on this issue?

Chairman

This is an interim report, in which we will acknowledge that many issues have come to light. The joint committee has written to IFSRA for a list of regulated and unregulated bodies.

Deputy Burton

Five Chesterton-type outfits exist. While they lend, they are not deemed to be banks because depositors are classed as investors.

Chairman

The general public incorrectly believes IFSRA regulates several other categories of organisation.

Deputy Burton

Many fall for the prominent afternoon television advertisements.

Chairman

I understand many hire purchase companies are not regulated by IFSRA.

Deputy Burton

Many of the lending agencies which advertise on television in the afternoon may well be registered in the United Kingdom, in which case they would come within the scope of UK regulations. I am sure constituents have raised this issue with members. Such advertisements constitute the hard sell of an expensive product.

Chairman

Is it agreed that we need to include a paragraph on the Ombudsman? We will do so.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I listened attentively to what Deputy Burton said about remortgaging. The rate attaching to a new mortgage is between 3.3% and 3.8%, depending on the institution from which one borrows. Remortgaging is different business. Many remortgage to get their hands on extra cash. Deputy Burton made the point that people use the money to pay their tax bills and for other purposes. One will be aware from the application form one completes and from an interview with an official that the institution from which one secures a mortgage will take a 2% margin, which charge is justified. It is not a mortgage, although the remortgage payment might include a partial mortgage payment. I have examined this issue because, like Deputy Burton, constituents have asked me to help them to deal with their debts and other issues. I have telephoned such institutions in this context. I queried a remortgage facility with a building society which charges 2% over the normal mortgage rate.

Deputy Burton

I am not talking about the building societies or the principal banks because, as the Deputy said, their remortgaging deals are reasonably clear. I am talking about special lending companies which advertise on television. Some of their packages are extraordinarily expensive.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

All legitimate lending companies are required to be registered.

Chairman

However, they are not regulated. That is the point at issue.

Mr. Dorgan

The institution in question may not be licensed or, as Deputy Burton said, regulated. A loan contract secured on a residence is subject to the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act under which the lender must show clearly what he or she proposes to do, allow a cooling off period and so on. I guess the Deputy is saying that is not good enough and that such institutions must be brought within the scope of IFSRA as regards licensing. Loans, if secured on a residence as a mortgage, must conform to the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act. The same rule applies to hire purchase agreements. They are regulated, although the institution providing the facility may not be. However, I believe most are because they are part of banks or financial intermediaries.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I do not want to name any intermediary or institution but Deputy Burton referred to one such entity whose activities came to light recently. Does it have money-lending status?

Mr. Dorgan

No, it is not a moneylender.

Deputy Burton

Such institutions are not moneylenders.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

What is the entity's classification?

Mr. Dorgan

Such entities are classified as "other". That is Deputy Burton's point. They do not fit into any legal category. They are not moneylenders because the rate of interest they charge is below 23%, the criterion in the current definition of a moneylender. They are not deposit-taking institutions but are probably credit institutions because they may grant loans. They do not come within the regulatory framework as matters stand. As companies, they are subject to the Companies Act and money-laundering regulations.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

We all know that big business can borrow money at a rate of 3.5% to 3.6%, within 1.5% of the ECB margin, yet some merchants or businesses which offer a credit facility charge their customers as much as 12%. Into what category do such operators fall?

Mr. Dorgan

Which entity is making such loans available?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I am aware of some cases where customers who buy on credit from a business or merchant are charged exorbitant rates compared to those charged by the banks. If such operators charge 12%, they receive additional revenue of more than one 1 cent in the euro on the base price of a product. Is it legal for a merchant to levy an interest charge on the credit facility available to a customer? This practice is followed by many operators.

Mr. Dorgan

It is, if the business does not charge more than 23% which would bring it into the money-lending category. If it does not take deposits, it is legal for it to do what the Deputy has described. Is he referring to a merchant who makes a loan available to a retail customer or to a business?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I am talking about a person who is building a house.

Mr. Dorgan

The credit facility applies to the purchase of building materials.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

Yes, for a period of six to nine months. A service charge has been imposed on the materials the person concerned has purchased which has made the cost outrageously expensive.

Mr. Dorgan

Into what category do such suppliers fall?

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

I do not think such a supplier comes within any specific category.

Senator Mansergh

The other side of the picture is that there are businesses such as, for example, Tipperary Co-operative, which charge a nominal interest rate of probably less than 1% if one does not pay one's bill within one month.

On a drafting point, following the discussion on paragraph 5.5, the reference to the recommendation underlined should presumably be changed to read that the joint committee also believes it is essential for transparency that bank borrowers be notified of changes in the interest rate margin.

Deputy Bruton

I notice Mr. Dorgan drew attention to the point that IFSRA should insist on a reduction in interest rates on some products, notably credit cards. That would go well beyond its existing legal powers. We should not get into the business of price regulation on the interest rate side as the charges are regulated. We should not extend regulation in this way. We should use the name and shame powers, the power of publicly informing consumers of what is involved in a package and leave IFSRA with the power to prohibit oppressive conditions. We should not introduce a system of policing interest rates. That would be a step too far. The authority does not have the legal powers to do so, even if we wanted to proceed in that way.

Deputy Burton

Should we welcome that the Financial Services Ombudsman takes a keen interest in this issue? We have mentioned his appointment from 1 April 2005 in the last paragraph on page 5. We made that amendment.

Mr. Dorgan

Members will be aware that there was considerable discussion on the matter. At least two members spoke explicitly about the control of interest rates. There is a health warning in the italicised text in which I point out, as Deputy Bruton said, that there might be a question about the legality of the control applied. There is also the question that if one controls the price of anything, in this case a loan, it may have an impact on the supply side. In other words, if one insists that the interest rate on credit cards can only be X%, credit cards would be withdrawn from some people, others would not be able to get one, or they would no longer be available. There is probably a challenge to be made to the legality of such control but there would be more practical problems in controlling interest rates. While I have a difficulty with controlling the price of anything, we are proceeding with the idea of controlling charges.

Senator Mansergh

There is the possibility of a compromise. Instead of what Mr. Dorgan stated, it could be stated that, in addition, IFSRA should indicate where it believes there is scope for a reduction in interest rates on some products, notably credit cards.

Chairman

Do members agree? Agreed.

We will proceed to the middle of paragraph 5.7 on page 21.

Mr. Dorgan

The Chairman contributed the items underlined. Deputy Ó Caoláin suggested that the regulation of bank charges should continue indefinitely. The Chairman expressed a slightly more moderate point of view.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I am prepared to live with the wording, as presented.

Chairman

The revised wording.

Mr. Dorgan

It was suggested that the charges might even be reduced. As I understand current Irish charges are relatively low, I did not include a suggestion that they could be further reduced.

Chairman

The next paragraph is on stamp duty.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

Did the meeting not agree that where bank charges are in place there can be an agreement between the banking institutions on what the charges should be and that this leads to inefficiency and lack of competition in charges? I believe I raised this at the last meeting.

Chairman

The issue of regulation of bank charges——

Deputy Burton

The regulation deals with notification, not setting the charges.

Chairman

The regulation deals with notification to get approval. They can all set competing rates.

Deputy Burton

Yes, they can charge what they wish or whatever the market will bear.

Chairman

Yes. We are not preventing that.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

Yes, but they are all on the same level.

Chairman

Not necessarily.

Deputy Burton

They must notify them.

Deputy Bruton

The interesting thing is that the charges in Ireland are low by international standards. That does not mean the overall financial package is low. The overall package is expensive but charges are low compared to the others. The notification requirement alone has resulted in keeping them down.

Deputy N. O’Keeffe

They are not regulated on the Continent.

Chairman

That is correct but they are much higher there.

Deputy Burton

They are not notified.

Deputy Bruton

The evidence is that Irish banks have much higher cost structures and are more expensive to deal with. We need to protect consumers from being used as a vehicle to claw back costs. I support the wording.

Chairman

Regulation does not interfere with competition. All the banks are regulated and they can still compete. We will move to stamp duty.

Mr. Dorgan

Yes. The suggestion was that stamp duty on credit cards would be abolished in the interests of promoting the use of credit cards as an alternative method of payment and to encourage competition among credit card companies. The cost is quite high. The committee will note that I did some research on this. A total of €59 million was paid in stamp duty on credit cards in 2004. The ATM or laser cards yielded €35 million. Abolishing those would be quite expensive. For that reason the proposal was dropped even though it could promote competition.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

They could be reduced.

Deputy Bruton

The committee should recommend that they should be restructured and reliance on stamp duties be reduced. If this makes electronic transfer of funds expensive and paper transfers inexpensive, it does not make sense. We should, without specifying what the restructuring should be, recommend that they be restructured and that reliance on this source of revenue be reduced. We should not be too prescriptive.

Senator Mansergh

In the order of oppressive forms of taxation, this is one of the least oppressive. By all means consider it but, frankly, the State must raise revenue. Generally, those using credit cards are not from the poorest sections of society. It is wrong perhaps to draw too much of a link. What inhibits the use of credit cards to a degree is that it makes transactions in shops slower. Personally, I prefer to have €100 to €150 in cash on me and pay for the purchase because it takes five or ten seconds instead of two or three minutes to conduct the transaction. There are inherent time factors. There would be vast queues in shops and the like if everybody were using credit cards. I do not know how often members have been standing behind people conducting credit card transactions when one is anxious to catch a train but the problem is the slowness of these transactions. It has nothing to do with the tax on them.

Chairman

That is a fair comment.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

That is so, particularly if one is not aware of one's new pin number.

Chairman

Yes, people are used to signing for it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

That was not the focus we had with regard to the credit cards. The stamp duty was really the small end of the wedge in the context of the main issue, which is the prohibitive and punitive interest rates that apply when one does not meet one's monthly payment requirement in certain months. Everyone has those difficulties, particularly at the start of the year after Christmas. It is extremely expensive and people are paying heavily for the use of that facility. The stamp duty is not the issue and I am happy to leave it as it stands.

Chairman

Can we agree to delete the last sentence on page 21? Agreed.

Mr. Dorgan

I do not wish to prolong the conversation but if one switches from credit cards to cash one will have to join a queue outside an ATM machine as people are withdrawing large amounts of money. With regard to the idea that credit cards are a preserve of the relativelywealthy, the situation has changed.

Senator Mansergh

I did not say that. I pointed out that generally they are not used by the poorest sections of society.

Mr. Dorgan

They are extensively used sometimes.

Chairman

We will move to paragraph 5.13 on page 22.

Mr. Dorgan

This is about bundling. There are pro-competitive aspects of bundling but not if bundling means the requirement that if one buys product A, one must buy product B from the supplier. This proposes that such practices would be normally banned. I believe it is in the proposed code of practice of the regulator.

Deputy Burton

When Mr. Dorgan refers to bundling, is this separate from the situation where when one buys a financial product a related product, such as insurance, is also forced on the purchaser when he or she does not necessarily need it?

Mr. Dorgan

Yes.

Deputy Burton

Is that bundling?

Mr. Dorgan

What I define here as bundling is where a product is forced on the person by the particular institution. An institution may require somebody who gets a mortgage to get mortgage protection insurance. It need not necessarily be from that institution but it is a requirement. That is normal. That is not bundling in this sense. Bundling is where somebody says: "You buy both of them from us or you do not get either of them."

Deputy Burton

At present, however, in cases of people remortgaging a house, some banks are seeking king's ransoms in insurance premia for anybody aged more than 50 years. There could be other reasons but the cases I have heard about, by and large, involve people aged over 50 years. If somebody really wants the money and does not want a big row with the bank, he or she takes the insurance product and, when the minimum period has elapsed, cancels it. That is what people are advising each other to do. The other option is shop around. If one shops around enough, some banks will say: "Your house is worth €700,000, you are getting an additional loan of €100,000 so we do not need mortgage protection."

This is one of those issues that I mentioned at the last meeting. I have received a couple of contacts about it. There is a clear need for consumer information that perhaps the bundled or adjunct product is not required at all.

Mr. Dorgan

The Deputy said people can shop around and get different deals. It would be unacceptable to the committee if a bank were to agree to give a loan only if the insurance were purchased from the bank as well. That is objectionable. If the customer can get the insurance elsewhere, that should be satisfactory to the bank.

With regard to the question about information, which comes up with the payment protection products, it is probable that people are inadequately informed. The code of practice proposed by IFSRA, which is still under consideration, will make it obligatory on the institutions to make it clear to individuals what they are insuring and how necessary or unnecessary it is. They must certify that in their opinion the product is a suitable one for that borrower. That creates about as much transparency as should be needed to alert the customer to the possibility that the insurance may not be worth it and is not necessary.

Chairman

We will have to adjourn our discussion as a vótáil has been called in the Dáil Chamber. Where do we stand? Can members complete this for next week? Do they have any further comments or do they wish to conclude this discussion?

Deputy Ó Caoláin

I think we should leave it.

Chairman

Yes. The vótáil will take 20 minutes.

Senator Mansergh

Will Mr. Dorgan come back again next week?

Chairman

It will not be next week.

Deputy Ó Caoláin

Whenever the next opportunity is, if that is suitable to Mr. Dorgan.

Chairman

If members have comments to make, it would be helpful if they could pass them to Mr. Dorgan through the committee secretariat. Some of this material could have worked its way into the document before today. Rather than discussing it, it would be helpful if it came back with everyone's comment included. It would speed matters up the next day if people have included their input.

Mr. Dorgan

The standing orders require that before the committee approves any document it must be gone through paragraph by paragraph. In other words, we have to come back here.

Chairman

Yes. The report has not been completed today so we will have to come back the next day. If members have observations they should feed them in so that our discussion will be clear with a view to finalising the report the next day.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.35 p.m. until 11.00 a.m. on Wednesday, 18 May 2005.