An issue has arisen following the liquidation of IBRC for the credit union movement in this country. A number of credit unions had fixed-term deposits with IBRC, which were due to be repaid in September of this year. As a result of the decision to liquidate the IBRC, many credit unions will suffer huge losses. Sources within the credit union movement say the losses could be as high as €17 million for credit unions across the county. It would be an incredible situation if that were the case.

We were told much work went into the preparation of the legislation some time ago. Was the Taoiseach aware of the level of implication for the credit union movement or that there would be this consequence for credit unions as a result of the decision to liquidate the IBRC? Why did the Government not consider making special provision for credit unions when preparing to take the decision? The losses involved will at a minimum wipe out any shareholder dividends credit union members could have anticipated in 2013 and 2014, and worse, unfortunately, may have an impact on the stability of some of the credit unions concerned.

Could the Taoiseach clarify the situation and what he intends to do? He promised before the election to burn senior bank bondholders, which did not happen. He did not do that and now we are in a situation where credit unions - the banks of ordinary people - have essentially been burned as a direct consequence of the decision taken by the Government. It seems that this is the only instance in the eurozone to date where depositors have taken a direct hit as a result of the decision to liquidate IBRC in the manner decided by the Government. It is wrong and something must be done about it.

As Deputy Martin is aware, this is a liquidation and clearly the liquidator is now examining all of the issues that arise following the liquidation of IBRC. He is also aware that €15 billion worth of bondholders have been burned already. Normal deposits are guaranteed here. It is impossible to distinguish between guaranteed and unguaranteed. The liquidator must find out the facts of what is involved.

In regard to credit unions, I am not aware at this time of the extent of deposits lodged by any credit unions in IBRC. Clearly, the examination of the liquidator will bring that to light in due course. The question of what the extent of that liability might or might not be remains to be seen and, if that is the case, that is a matter that must be examined in respect of any funding that might be available for credit unions, but it is impossible to distinguish between depositors here. Normal deposits are guaranteed but I cannot tell the Deputy at this stage to what extent, if any, credit unions have been involved here.

I find it incredible that the Taoiseach is saying that he is not aware of the implications of this for credit unions and that he does not know about this. We were told that this legislation was prepared as far back as November and was just ready to be revealed to the House. The use of phrases such as "normal deposits" does not stand up. If one looks at the prospectus alone, the position is clear. They were offered 100% capital security at maturity through an eight year, three month, fixed-term deposit facility. There was never any indication that they would be burned as a result of any action by Government.

I find it extraordinary what the Taoiseach is saying in this respect. In the drafting of the legislation there must have been people who went through the implications of the legislation in terms of upon whom it would impact. It was not a secret to anyone in the Department of Finance, the NTMA or anywhere else that the credit unions had deposits with Anglo Irish Bank, subsequently IBRC. Surely the implications of the liquidation would have been spelt out to the Taoiseach before he and the Minister brought the legislation to the House. I find it incredible that the Taoiseach is saying he is not aware of this. This is a very serious situation for the credit unions concerned. The chatter around the credit union movement is that they are talking about €17 million as an estimate in this respect and it might be higher or lower than that. I asked the Taoiseach initially whether he was aware of this and he said he was not, which I find incredible. What does he intend to do to support the credit union movement as a result of this very significant hit?

Thank you, Deputy.

Bank bondholders - senior bondholders - were protected and now we find ourselves in the incredible position where credit unions have been burned, essentially.

Thank you, Deputy. You are over your time.

At this stage the question arises as to what the Government can do to protect and underpin the credit unions concerned.

Obviously the Government responded and listened carefully to credit union inquiries and anxieties arising from the report into the future of credit unions. The Deputy is aware that this was a liquidation. Therefore, we were not going to have the Government going around saying it intended to liquidate IBRC and that if people had money in it, to take it out. It is important to note that while there were comments and some allegations of these reports-----

They were told that there would be an orderly wind down. That is why they did not take their money out.

-----it is important to understand that I am not aware, as we stand here today, of the full extent of liability of any credit union or numbers of credit unions for moneys lodged in IBRC. That will emerge during the course of the next period ahead.

The Taoiseach must have had an idea.

Deputy Martin, please desist.

Somebody must have produced a paper on this internally as part of the preparation for this.

Did the Deputy hear me?

The liquidator is entitled to analyse what exactly is the situation in the liquidated IBRC. The Deputy is aware that there is a fund of €500 million available for the recapitalisation of credit unions if they are in trouble. The first thing we should do is to have the liquidator determine what, if any, is the extent of credit union investment in IBRC, what deposits, if any, credit unions have made in it, the extent of those deposits, and if there is a serious situation-----

The Taoiseach must know the amount of the deposits.

-----as the Deputy alleges, and we do not know the full extent of that, clearly-----

He must know that.

-----the fund of €500 million that is available for dealing with difficulties in regard to the credit unions may be called into play.

The Taoiseach must have known how much was deposited by the credit unions.

I call Deputy Gerry Adams.

You do not go around telling them that you are going to liquidate the bank, do you?

Deputy Adams, please.

The Taoiseach must have known how much was deposited by the credit unions.

In case he did not hear me, I call Deputy Gerry Adams for the third time.