We do not know if AIB Bank will rename its currency department the "foreign short change desk" but we know that the bank's swindling of its foreign exchange customers of up to €25 million is only the latest in a long saga of scams by many banks to maximise their already bloated profits through dubious means. Why do powerful financial institutions feel, after all the previous scandals, that they can still swindle their customers, let alone levy bank charges on us with impunity?

Is it not the case that under the Taoiseach's seven-year stewardship, he has operated a different law for the economically powerful in society in contrast with how small people are treated? His Government has operated a nauseating double standard by which the economically powerful may occasionally get mild slaps on the wrist, mainly verbal, but are not really held accountable. In the absence of the Taoiseach last week, I asked the Minister for Defence, Deputy Michael Smith, about some of the double standards. The Taoiseach may have heard the Minister found himself severely challenged in the articulation department in response to Opposition questions.

A young person may take possession of a Garda hat and find himself or herself charged with stealing and lodged in jail for many days with the threat of being kept there longer. Major banks stole up to €1 billion from taxation funds, which means it came from health services, hospitals and schools. How many of the 7,000 gardaí mobilised on May Day did the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, ask to knock on the door of the boardroom of a major bank and ask the simple question of who organised the rackets and tax frauds and instructed staff around the country, factoring it into the profits of the bank "going forward", as they like to say in business circles? Is it not the reality that, after seven years of Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats rule, the Ansbacher men and the organisers of the big bank tax frauds have as much chance of being dragged before a court as the poor, stone age men the National Roads Authority is now turning up every second week?

The Deputy left out the fact this Government moved from the position under the Consumer Credit Act 1995, whereby credit institutions were required to notify the Director of Consumer Affairs on any charges imposed by them, but the director was not able to do much about it. That responsibility was transferred to the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority which this Government established exactly one year ago, and severe financial penalties are provided for in the Act. As we know, AIB indicated that in the mid-1990s it was charging 1% on non-cash transactions exceeding IR£500,000. It notified the Director of Consumer Affairs that it was charging 0.5%. The error related to a single charge among a large number notified to the Director of Consumer Affairs. It appears AIB noticed its discrepancy two years ago but no action was taken. In April 2004, IFSRA received an anonymous call raising the issue. On 30 April, IFSRA raised the matter with compliance officials in AIB and the matter was raised in the media the following week. Statements have been made. IFSRA has launched an investigation into this matter as it is the relevant authority. It has very strong powers and is actively pursuing the matter with AIB at a senior level. It can impose severe financial penalties.

On a point of order, there are no penalties.

There is no point of order since the question is that of Deputy Joe Higgins. I ask Deputy Burton to resume her seat.

AIB today lodged €25 million with the Central Bank on a good-faith basis at the request of IFSRA. We will see where the matter moves from there. However, IFSRA, which has only been in place for a year, has the powers and functions to deal with this matter.

I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

On a point of order.

I am sorry, Deputy Burton, but there are no points of order on Leaders' Questions except from the leader who submitted the question. I ask Deputy Burton to resume her seat. She will leave the House if she does not do so.

I can get the details any time from IFSRA's report. Why does it happen? I asked the Taoiseach to explain why the climate his Government allows to obtain lets that happen; he did not do so. Big bankers and barristers can rob us with impunity by legal and illegal means but the Taoiseach and his Government stand over their greed. That is the problem. The Taoiseach may wave the odd velvet glove in their direction but there is no iron fist inside it in terms of the consequences they have been asked to carry. Is it any wonder my colleagues have tabled a motion tonight about the mismanagement and misapplication of public funding and the projects that suffer as a result? The Taoiseach could mobilise thousands of gardaí on May Day to protect occupying powers——

The two minutes are concluded.

——included among his guests who are responsible for mass murder and the organised torture of prisoners. In other words, he gives them the same immunity he gives to big business when it comes to making it really accountable for its actions. He threw a backbencher to the wolves last week because he had no choice, but there was a point to her protestations. She is being scapegoated. She should not have escaped but the others who are responsible behind it all have never been called to account.

The Deputy's time is up.

It is time the banking system was brought into line. It should be publicly owned and democratically controlled because then, with the significant power it has over our lives——

I must ask Deputy Higgins to give way to the Taoiseach. If Members are not happy with the Standing Order they know how to change it.

——perhaps it could be applied for the benefit of society rather than swindling it, which the Taoiseach's Government allows it to do.

I accept the point that IFSRA is the body and the Irish management services Bill has the penalties.

There is no penalty for this offence.

The Bill with the penalties is before the House. I accept the point. The new Bill is the Irish management services Bill.

It has no penalties.

The new Bill.

We set up IFSRA to deal with consumer aspects of these issues. The necessary powers are in the Irish management services Bill to deal with these issues.

I do not want to——

The Deputy asked me——

The Taoiseach must answer the question. Why do they feel they can continually do this? Is it any wonder when they have the Taoiseach in charge of the country?

I ask Deputy Joe Higgins to resume his seat. He had his opportunity and his one minute. He shall resume his seat when the Chair is on his feet.

The Deputy asked me why the DPP does not take action. The DPP is independent of the Government. That is the answer to the Deputy's question. The Prosecution of Offences Act 1974 makes the DPP independent. He receives this case and deals with it on that basis.

What is the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform——

I am sorry, Deputy Higgins. If the Taoiseach addressed his remarks through the Chair we might be able to control the Deputy.

The new legislation deals with a wide range of issues. In addition to the penalty provisions, there will be significant extra powers for IFSRA regarding requiring financial statements from institutions and evidence of compliance with legislation, known as compliance statements, which IFSRA may also require to be signed off by auditors. The Bill also provides for a financial services ombudsman scheme. There are existing schemes for credit institutions and the insurance industry. The Bill will provide for a single scheme with a more comprehensive remit and for the first time a statutory framework for this service. The legislation therefore includes powers.