We use Google Analytics to see which pages are read and how the site is used, so we know what to improve. This only runs if you accept. See our privacy notice for details.

Dáil
‹ Ceisteanna ar Reachtaíocht a Gealladh - Questions on Promised Legislation

Third banking force and Ulster Bank

Summary

Deputy Nash again raised Ulster Bank's future and suggested Permanent TSB as a partner. The Tánaiste said a third banking force would be welcome but any solution had to be strong and viable.

As the Tánaiste knows, we are reaching the endgame on Ulster Bank and the imminent decision we expect from NatWest. Obviously, Ulster Bank is at a crossroads. Earlier, the Tánaiste mentioned the need to consider a third banking force in the context of Irish banking and the Irish economy. It seems that an obvious partner for Ulster Bank's assets and business would potentially be Permanent TSB. I say this because we can use our significant influence as the major shareholder of Permanent TSB to leverage a positive outcome for Irish workers and Irish business and seek to break the Bank of Ireland and AIB duopoly. We know we have issues with competition in this country. It is not just, of course, because we have a limited number of banks in the market as there are also other issues. Will the Tánaiste comment on how he sees the proposition of a third banking force developing over the next period of time?

Comment on this
Leo Varadkar The Tánaiste Fine Gael

I understand where the Deputy is going with this but I am constrained by stock market rules in what I can say in this regard. What I will say is, as I said earlier, that the Government supports the concept of establishing a third banking force with sufficient scale to challenge Bank of Ireland and AIB. We have never really had that in Ireland and it would be a good thing to have it. We also need to make sure we get it right. The last thing we want to establish is a third banking force that is weak at birth. It needs to be strong and this needs to be borne in mind in any decision that we make.

Comment on this