Directors' role - Banks' interest v Public interest.

[He3]

B Lenihan is appointing people to panels from which some bank directors will be selected 'in the public interest'. He says these people he puts on the panel are fit to look after the public interest.

There is a catch.

He is letting the Banks' shareholders select from the panel the one or two people they want to add to the Bank Board of Directors.

There is a second catch.

He admits these Directors must work in the shareholders' interests, as distinct from the public interest. Just like ordinary Directors. Like the ones who are keeping their posts now for example.

What exactly is his point?

Edit - Extract from draft Scheme:

In order to promote the public interest, a covered institution shall, at the direction of the Minister, take all reasonable steps to appoint at least one but no more than two non-executive directors to its board from a panel approved by the Minister during the period of the guarantee. The covered institution shall remunerate those non-executive directors.

[goosebump]

B Lenihan is appointing people to panels from which some bank directors will be selected 'in the public interest'. He says these people he puts on the panel are fit to look after the public interest. There is a catch.

He is letting the Banks' shareholders select from the panel the two people they want to add to the Bank Board of Directors.

There is a second catch. He admits these Directors must work in the shareholders' interests, as distinct from the public interest. Just like ordinary Directors. Like the ones who are keeping their posts now for example.

What exactly is his point?

Well he is correct.

Bank Directors have a feduciary responsibility to their shareholers. That's presribed by company law.

The difficulty here is that the State is seeking to appoint Directors on foot of offering a guarantee rather than taking an equity stake, in which case the State appointed Director would have every right to look out for the taxpayer.

Maybe appointing a Director isn't the answer. We don't necessarily need a Director; we just need someone in there to let us know what is going on.

[He3]

Letting us know what is going on is something that these Directors will pretty much be precluded from doing because of the rules on confidentiality and the fiduciary duties on them to the shareholders that you mention.

So what is Minister Lenihan at here? Is this any more than window dressing?

[FakeViking]

Why does this remind me of the former misLeader appointing his 'friends' to State bodies?

[powderfinger]

Letting us know what is going on is something that these Directors will pretty much be precluded from doing because of the rules on confidentiality and the fiduciary duties on them to the shareholders that you mention.

So what is Minister Lenihan at here? Is this any more than window dressing?

The CIFS scheme was discussed on RTE this morning at 7.20 .Banker's spokesman Pat Farrell and Colm Mc Carthy commented.The text of the scheme addresses the solvency issues in Paddybanking.
"The Minister can direct the Banks to improve solvency."
Colm Mc Carthy's succinct translation of this clause was well put."Wishful thinking on speed."

[Anorakphobia]

Directors must act in the best interest of shareholders?
What bloody shareholders?

16 directors to be appointed by the Government to the 8 largest Banks in the State!
What cheers me immensely is the thought of Ahern sitting with his crook pals crying into their pints at missing the action.

"Ah jaysus lads, this was the big score, the El Dorado of cronyism and here we are sitting on the shaggin sidelines"

Meanwhile in a graveyard in Sutton, tremors are reported.

[junketman]

B Lenihan is appointing people to panels from which some bank directors will be selected 'in the public interest'. He says these people he puts on the panel are fit to look after the public interest.

There is a catch.

He is letting the Banks' shareholders select from the panel the one or two people they want to add to the Bank Board of Directors.

There is a second catch.

He admits these Directors must work in the shareholders' interests, as distinct from the public interest. Just like ordinary Directors. Like the ones who are keeping their posts now for example.

What exactly is his point?

Edit - Extract from draft Scheme:

In order to promote the public interest, a covered institution shall, at the direction of the Minister, take all reasonable steps to appoint at least one but no more than two non-executive directors to its board from a panel approved by the Minister during the period of the guarantee. The covered institution shall remunerate those non-executive directors.

I have no problem with state nominated directors...

But if Bertie Ahern is nominated to any of these banks I will have a fit...

I think someone like the head of the Central Bank should nominate the directors, someone relatively independent...

The last thing we need are political hacks appointed in these roles and using political pressure on the banks, and trying to get their private business fixed up as well, ie preferential loans, debts written off...

That said some of the people I would nominate would be trained experts in the field at least of economics, people like Shane Ross, David McWilliams...

But please no idiotic politician clown appointees looking for another gravy train to feast on.

[katy brock]

I have no problem with state nominated directors...

But if Bertie Ahern is nominated to any of these banks I will have a fit...

I think someone like the head of the Central Bank should nominate the directors, someone relatively independent...

The last thing we need are political hacks appointed in these roles and using political pressure on the banks, and trying to get their private business fixed up as well, ie preferential loans, debts written off...

That said some of the people I would nominate would be trained experts in the field at least of economics, people like Shane Ross, David McWilliams...

But please no idiotic politician clown appointees looking for another gravy train to feast on.

It's a nice idea but I doubt FF would countenance the likes of McWilliams or Ross on the panel. Even if they did, no bank would select them because they know too much about banking and would be impossible to gag.

The usual herd of overfed FF stalwarts are lobbying like hell to get their trotters behind one of these boardroom tables and plunge their greasy snouts into the trough. Insider trading will be taken to a new level/depth!

[Oppenheimer]

Its a pity Martin Cahill is dead - he'd been in most of the banks and knows exactly what's going on!

[katy brock]

Its a pity Martin Cahill is dead - he'd been in most of the banks and knows exactly what's going on!

Beverley Cooper-Flynn and Joe Burke look like shoo-ins to me.