Banking inquiry testimony - Where are the laws to curb banks?

THE banking inquiry hearings of the last two days have reminded us, like old, slightly embarassing wedding photographs, that the past is not always as we might wish it to be.

They reminded us that even with the benefit of hindsight, that great, uncompromising leveller, that some realities stand no matter how we try to shout them down, no matter how assertive we are about revising history — or no matter how delusional we choose to be.

Wednesday’s star-struck performance by former finance minister Charlie McCreevy was, frankly, cringe-making. His refusal to accept that any of his policies might have contributed to our downfall and his preposterous self-imposed veto on discussing matters that arose after he left the Dáíl for Brussels, all point to the kind of self awareness more based on wishful thinking than helpful honesty. It is hard to remember a more skewed analysis at any of our public inquiries.

Yesterday his colleague Brian Cowen played his cards very differently. He was — possibly — contrite but he was most assuredly assertive. He showed he has lost none of his old abrasiveness or self-belief. He dismissed some suggestions — like the one that Fianna Fáil might be favourably disposed towards property developers — with the kind of indignation that might convince a half-awake spectator that his assertion was true but any vaguely sentient listener would have at least raised an eyebrow at the bizarre dismissal.

His visit to the inquiry highlighted one of the weaknesses of the process — pitching the alpha males of our political process against the foot soldiers who usually make up the Oireachtas committees. At moments yesterday it was obvious why Mr Cowen became Taoiseach and why so many of those questioning him cannot hope to reach those heights. It may have been an inquiry made up of his peers but they could hardly cope with Mr Cowen’s force of personality.

Mr Cowen’s testimony touched a recurring theme. He pointed out that on occasion his Government had to make generation-defining decisions without having all the facts or make decisions based on facts that were little more than hints at the truth. He said the primary responsibility for the crisis lies with the banks. Once again the too-big-to-fail, the too-big-to-control theme emerged.

Despite this hard lesson we have not, it seems, learnt enough to put this kind of legisation in place that would ensure rogue bankers, and there will be more, never bring this society to that point again. Neither have we found the gumption to bring in the kind of legislation that would have prevented some banks giving two fingers to Finance Minister Michael Noonan’s request for a July 1 package of measures to reduce spectacularly high variable mortgage rates.

An honest appraisal of the poor behaviour that led to our economic collapse will find that nearly all of us played our foolish part but without reckless domestic banks borrowing from reckless international lenders, the banks would not have had the ammunition for such carnage. However, we have not yet found the courage to confront those institutions that can wield such power without responsibility.