The Irish League of Credit Unions faces a difficult meeting today when delegates at a special conference will be asked to reform its funding structure.

A highly critical report earlier this year urged that the system be scrapped in favour of a more transparent structure. But bad feeling over a bungled ISIS computer project, in which more than €30 million was lost, is expected to loom again at the meeting today in Galway.

The gathering follows a separate initiative to reform the movement at a special meeting last April.

It was brought forward by one year in a move that is thought to have been a response to the withdrawal by 10 member unions of their insurance policies from the league's monopoly provider, ECCU.

Only 330 of the league's 530 member unions invested in the abandoned ISIS project, yet all will be asked today to pay a levy to recover some of the losses. If accepted, such a levy would be embraced in a new funding model.

It is proposed that the league would be funded through affiliation fees while ECCU would be run on a cost-recovery basis only.

The league is funded from ECCU's monopoly profits in the current system and those unions which withdrew their business argued its prices were uncompetitive.

In addition, ECCU has been the subject of scrutiny by the Competition Authority, which has revoked a certificate stating that a requirement on member unions to deal with ECCU did not offend the Competition Act.

While the authority's revocation is expected to be discussed, it is thought the meeting will be dominated by the funding issue.

A league spokesman said the new system was designed to foster transparency and openness. It was up to members to decide on the new funding system, he said.

This was part of the reform proposal in a special report on the movement by consultant Mr Phil Flynn.

Subscriptions in the new system would remain relatively stable, it is believed, suggesting that the new model might find support. But in a movement riven by internal dissent and alienation, observers believe agreement on the ISIS levy will be very difficult.

The league is asking all its member unions to recoup the €7 million it lost on the ISIS project.

In addition, all member unions will also be asked to recoup the €6 million lost by 150 of the ISIS unions when they made additional subscriptions above the standard rate of €12.70 per depositor.

Some €15 million lost from the standard subscriptions will not be recovered at all.

The crucial issue for debate today is whether those unions which did not pay the additional subscriptions should be required to compensate those who did.

This group includes the 200 unions which made no investment in ISIS and the 180 who paid only the standard subscription.

Opposition has already surfaced, it is believed. For example, it is believed that secondary teachers in the ASTI credit union have already opposed the levies.

The ASTI credit union is likely to propose a motion asking that the league make up its own deficit through additional revenue streams, perhaps from rents charged for the use of credit union buildings.

The ASTI also wants to scrap the proposed levy to make up the additional subscriptions.

The extent of support for its motion is unknown, although league meetings have been acrimonious affairs in the past.