Vol. 488 No. 1
23 Mr. McDowell asked the Minister for Finance if he will make a statement on the Government's intentions in relation to ICC and ACC; the contacts, if any, he or his officials have had or propose to have with management and staff in these companies; and if he will confirm that he will consider all reasonable proposals including proposals from the trade unions. [5642/98]
I refer the Deputy to the reply I gave to a number of similar questions on 28 January. As I stated on that occasion, the Government authorised me to enter into consultations with the boards, management and staff of the ACC and ICC banks with a view to developing detailed proposals on their future structure and ownership in a way which would recognise the interests of all stakeholders, including the taxpayer. I held meetings with the management and staff in the banks on 8 December 1997 and there are continuing contacts between my officials and the bank management and staff unions. I am currently awaiting formal submissions from the staff unions in both banks. I expect to receive these shortly, at which stage I will assess the position with a view to bringing definitive proposals before the Government.
I thank the Minister for his response. In his reply to questions on 28 January the Minister said that the one option which is not available is the continuation of the current situation which he described as unacceptable. Why does he consider the current situation to be unacceptable?
When I met with the management and staff of the banks on 8 December I said that all options, except the continuation of the status quo, could be considered. I am glad the unions indicated in their subsequent comments to the media that they accepted the status quo could not continue.
Why is it unacceptable?
Given the new climate nationally and internationally, it would not be in the long-term interests of the ACC and ICC to allow them continue in this fashion. This was the view of the Deputy's party when it was in Government, and it has been recognised by me, other politicians and the staff and management of the institutions concerned.
The Minister has not answered my question. My motivation for asking the question is simple: I want to ascertain the Minister's motivation for changing the status quo. It would help us to understand this if he told us what he considers to be unacceptable about the status quo.
It is not the role of Government during the late 1990s to own 100 per cent of two banks. The Government gave the ACC an additional £15 million over the past few years and gave the ICC an additional £10 million last year. The State cannot continue to provide the banking, marketing and product development expertise which these banks require. It is in this context that the future of the banks is being addressed.
The Minister has confirmed that he does not intend to retain total State ownership of these banks. Does he intend to retain a majority share in them?
I was authorised on foot of a Government decision to spell out to the unions, staff and management on 8 December that a sale of up to and including 100 per cent can be contemplated. However, I ruled nothing in or out. This was a worthwhile meeting for the staff, management, me and my officials. The unions took what I said on board and will submit their proposals to me as soon as possible, after which I will consider all these matters. I am ruling nothing in or out.
The Minister has ruled something out. He indicated that he intends to dispose of at least part of the State's holding in these banks and, to that extent, he is ruling out the status quo. In fairness, he has been clear on this point.
The Minister has given the distinct impression in the House today and elsewhere on previous occasions that he is antagonistic to the State maintaining any foothold in the commercial banking sector. If I am wrong, maybe he will do me the favour of correcting me. I would like to be clear that the Minister's mind is genuinely open, particularly as regards the possibility of retaining a majority share should that be the wish of the management and staff of the banks concerned.
In which contribution did I make antagonistic remarks about State ownership of these banks?
The only possibility contemplated in the reply to the questions in January was that the State could sell up to 100 per cent of its shareholding. The Minister repeated this today.
The Deputy alleged that I was antagonistic. I want him to quote from the contribution in which I gave this impression.
A few minutes ago the Minister said he did not see a role for the State in the banking sector in the late 1990s.
What I said is that the only option not on the table is the retention of the status quo. The staff, management and unions in both institutions recognise this and are preparing their plans on this basis. Matters have moved on during the past decade in terms of the thinking of many trade unions and these institutions and they recognise that the continuation of the status quo is not on. The only option I ruled out at the meeting was the retention of the status quo, and this was accepted by all concerned. Everything else is on the table.
Does the Minister see a role for the State in the commercial banking sector?
I have ruled nothing in or out. The ACC staff unions have put together proposals, about which they informed my officials last Friday as a matter of courtesy. They said these proposals would be put to their members during the weekend and they would be voted on in the coming weeks, following which they will put their formal proposals to me. I thank the unions in the ACC for extending this courtesy to the Department. I want to make it clear that the staff in both these institutions are well engaged in the process of moving forward on the basis of progressive thinking.
