Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FORMER IBRC CHAIRMAN Alan Dukes has revealed more details about the fractious relationship between the bank and the Department of Finance.
During an extensive press briefing in Dublin this afternoon, Dukes didn’t hold back in his criticism of the department and, in particular, its former secretary general John Moran.
Dukes said there were “some odd ideas about governance going around in the Department of Finance”.
He said that at one stage Moran wanted to appoint two further directors to the bank and “seemed to believe that all he needed to do was tell the Central Bank that it was okay to appoint these two people and that they would be on the board”.
Dukes said Moran was “taken aback” and “seemed a bit annoyed with me when I again pointed out to him that the process was not that simple”.
He said IBRC had to meet the people and recommend them to the Central Bank before the minister could appoint them.
“[Moran] thought I was bring obstructive,” Dukes recalled, saying he was “just following the dictates of good governance”.
Dukes said Moran, in a private conversation, expressed a wish join the IBRC board shortly after he becoming secretary general.
The former chair said he told Moran he didn’t think this would be appropriate as he would be “seriously conflicted”.
When Moran made the point the Treasury in the UK had appointed a treasury civil servant to the board of Northern Rock, Dukes said he told him that was different as he was “not the person who was in charge of making banking policy for the Treasury”.
When asked if the deterioration in the relationship between the department and IBRC could be traced back to Moran’s appointment, Dukes said:
It definitely took a turn for the complicated at that point.
Dukes, who served as a minister for finance in the 1980s, said it was frustrating that the department kept raising issues that the bank considered closed, noting this “didn’t seem to be a particularly good way of going about these things”.
The former chair of the bank said that despite the fact a new board was in place some people “continued to regard the new Anglo [IBRC] as the enemy”.
He confirmed that he and former IBRC CEO Mike Aynsley are seeking all documentation referring to them from the Department of Finance.
When asked if he thought the recent release of heavily-redacted Freedom of Information files equated to him being “thrown under a bus”, Dukes noted:
I try not to be paranoid, but of course that doesn’t mean that they’re not out to get you.
He said he wasn’t currently considering legal action.
Of the relationship between Aynsley and businessman Denis O’Brien Dukes said he “didn’t think anything in that relationship had an influence on transactions with IBRC” beyond making sure O’Brien stayed a “fully performing client of the bank”.
In terms of the Siteserv sale, Dukes said he was “extremely angry” at suggestions of malpractice or criminality.
The sale of Siteserv and other transactions made by IBRC (formerly Anglo Irish Bank) has made political waves over the past few days as documents released through the Freedom of Information Act revealed tensions between the bank and officials at the department.
Siteserv was sold to the Denis O’Brien-owned Millington by IBRC in 2012 for €45 million. Anglo had given Siteserv a loan of €150 million, meaning the bank wrote off €105 million and the State got back less than €50 million. At the same time, shareholders were paid €5 million.
Noonan could have fired him
Dukes said he spoke to Michael Noonan briefly on 21 April: “I phoned him simply to tell him that I was extremely concerned at what was coming out.”
On his relationship with the finance minister, Dukes said: “As far as I know, there is no personal animus between us.”
He noted that the end of a “fairly tough meeting” in July 2012, he told Noonan to expect a letter from the IBRC board asking to reappoint him as chair.
Dukes noted Noonan could have fired him but instead said:
I’ve known with you for a long time and worked with you for along time and we’re not going to stop now.
Dukes also addressed the issue of Noonan being recorded in the minutes of a meeting with IBRC of not being confident about accounting for the bank’s actions in answers to the Dáil.
When he heard this, Dukes said he asked his former Fine Gael colleague if there was ever a case where he was nervous or embarrassed about going into the Dáil with IBRC’s information. Noonan said he hadn’t.
Yesterday evening Noonan announced that the liquidators of IBRC would review transactions carried out by the bank that resulted in a capital loss of at least €10 million.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said the government has “nothing to hide” in relation to the Siteserv sale. However, opposition leaders Micheál Martin and Gerry Adams said the review doesn’t go far enough.
The Department of Finance hadn’t replied to a request for comment at the time of publication. John Moran has also been contacted for comment.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Remember this only impacts women who do not receive company top ups on their mat leave pay so lowest paid . At an absolute minimum they should have their maternity extended as they can’t go back to their jobs . The gov showed how fast they could move by creating the pandemic payment so they need to address this anomoly.
@Laura Grimes: I agree that this anomaly needs to be addressed immediately as someone who has recently returned from Mat leave. However, it affects more than just low paid workers as those who have been on unpaid leave prior to returning to work will also be disproportionately affected.
@Laura Grimes: no it also affects women whose wages were topped up by their employer during maternity leave because Revenue are only considering the top-up amount and not taking into account the maternity benefit which makes up their total wage. On top of this it affects men on paternity benefit for three weeks over January or February.
I often wonder why the government have to be dragged kicking and screaming to adjudication before they relent and do the right thing, it just wastes more time and money (ours) before they are made to put it right, ..and followed by the usual apologises.
@Honeybee: because they’re just waiting for you to give up and forget about it…
This applies to men as well who were on paternity leave as well as anyone, male or female, who was on reduced or no pay in Jan or Feb 2020.. it is not related to maternity leave or women alone… This is not saying it is just or correct but I hope that men will be treated equally here too…
@Niall Ó Cofaigh: Yes for the love of god let’s hope the men are treated equally here, because they always have to end their careers and take on the burden of childcare, it’s society’s most pressing issue today!
@Niall Ó Cofaigh: paternity leave is 6 weeks, so you would have at least one payslip from January or February. Non-issue
@Julian Friesel: What about people who might have been on sick leave, with say a heart attack? It does seem so obviously unjust and I don’t see why anyone would have to bring it to court to get it corrected.
This is discrimination they could just use the last full pay slip they had before they started maternity leave
@Buster Cat: You’re actually on to something there when you think about what you’ve said and the whole Covid19 payment scheme.
Television gives us a window on the world so why hasn’t the Irish Human Rights Commission objected to the laws restricting our right to own a television The government insists that those in direct provision have access to sky tv because government considers access a human right issue
@Richard Russell: What law restricts our right to own a tv, this is a new one to me?????
@Tony Harris: Tony you need a tv licence to own a tv
@Richard Russell: and that is a law that restricts your rights? I see without a tv you are making your own drama!
I came off work for an operation which was cancelled due to the pandemic. I stopped work 2 week before covid payment came in.Im stuck on 203 euro until i can have it. Until then i recieve €239 per week for me and 2 kids. My wife has 2 weeks left on maternity so we will loose out double. Ive worked for years. I Feel robbed.
@james kelly: to clarify i am on sick leave not the dole. Have health insurance but my job are not helping me. Even took my diesel card and toll tag until i come back
@james kelly: That’s wrong too – I’m sure anyone in your situation can do with an equal payment. I hope you get your operation as soon as possible.
And none of these unions TDs etc batted an eyelid when the covid payment wasn’t given to job seekers many who would have had payslips from January and February
have your say