Madam, - If the definition of a good journalist is one who "afflicts the comfortable and comforts the afflicted", then RTÉ's Charlie Bird and George Lee are remarkably good. Without these two there would have been no report of the High Court inspectors on NIB.
One of the findings of the report was that improper interest and fees were charged on many customer accounts. The day after the publication of the report, speaking on RTÉ lunchtime radio, Charlie Bird said sources revealed that the practice of overcharging customers was widespread among other financial institutions. Until this matter is fully and independently investigated it should be of interest to every bank customer unless they regard unjustified overcharging as an acceptable type of "complacency charge".
Of course we would have known nothing of these matters without the amazing courage of an NIB employee who was prepared to act as a "whistle-blower" and reveal the information to Charlie Bird. According to George Lee, NIB boasted that it would use its enormous financial resources to discover the identity of the whistle-blower. This threat of discovery, with the implicit threat of retribution, explains how senior executives can confidently conceal misconduct.
It has been suggested that banks should voluntarily introduce mechanisms which officials could use to bring to light misconduct which they have encountered without fear of damaging their career prospects. However, I suspect that most bank officials would suspect such a mechanism as being a strategy for the entrapment of potential whistle-blowers. A bank official with a family and a mortgage should be entitled to stronger protection before passing the point of no return and blowing the whistle.
In 1999 a whistle-blowers' protection Bill was introduced in the Dáil and gained cross-party support, but has since inexplicably languished in obscurity. Contrast that delay with the way company law was changed in record time by introducing the concept of examinership to protect a meat processing company from its creditors.
It has been suggested that we should minimise the financial misconduct of NIB because it might frighten off foreign banks from investing in Ireland. On the contrary, it seems more likely that foreign banks would avoid investing in Ireland if there was a suggestion that some banks had a competitive advantage by overcharging their customers while the authorities failed to introduce whistle-blower protection legislation that would allow the exposure of such corruption.
Banks that have not overcharged their customers would have nothing to fear from this legislation so you would expect senior bank executives to publicly campaign for this legislation to reassure their customers. But all we hear from them on this issue is the sound of silence. - Yours, etc.,
JOSEPH MARRON,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
A Chara, - After the recent revelations about the ethics, or lack of them, in banking, we read that profits in ethically exposed banks continue to rise. One question that commentators frequently ask is why customers don't move to another bank. While the cynical answer to this question may reflect the view often expressed of our politicians that "they're all the same", I suspect that the cost, disruption and effort required in changing banks is a significant deterrent.
The Tánaiste, Mary Harney, has signalled her intention to leave her post at the "Ministry of Competition", but I would implore her to complete work on improving the mobility of consumer banking before she moves on. - Is mise,
BRIAN LOONEY,
Woodlawn Road,
Killarney,
Co Kerry.
Madam, - While listening to the radio last week I heard a most interesting phrase: banking ethics. I wonder: is this the ultimate oxymoron? - Yours, etc.,
SHAUN McCANN,
Church Avenue,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
Madam, - Now that the dust is beginning to settle on the AIB and NIB scandals, is it safe to presume that the other Bs are squeaky clean - or have they just been better at concealing the facts? - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL DALY,
Butterfield Orchard,
Dublin 14.