Former Irish Nationwide chief executive Michael Fingleton, spoke briefly today about the bank bailout, a day after it emerged it is likely to cost more than the €2.7 billion initially pledged to bail out the institution he once headed.
Mr Fingleton resigned as chief executive in April 2009 after it emerged that he had received the bonus just weeks after the Government introduced the State bank guarantee the previous September.
He promised in March 2009 to voluntarily return the money, even though he was “entitled beyond any doubt” to receive it. He has yet to do so, despite calls by Government Ministers and Opposition leaders that he return it.
At Dublin Airport today, Mr Fingleton was asked by RTÉ whether he had any sense of remorse about what had happened in relation to the bank bailout and the cost to the taxpayer.
“Of course I have. Of course I have. Like everybody else. I have indeed,” he said.
Asked what could be done about it, Mr Fingleton said: “Everything is being done that possibly can be done by everybody concerned.”
In April, the building society’s new management revealed that high-risk lending practices at Irish Nationwide were reported to the board and the Financial Regulator by external accountants over a long period but did not change its behaviour.
The building society reported a loss of €2.5 billion for 2009 after writing off nearly €2.8 billion in loans – almost a quarter of its €10.5 billion loan book – due to high-risk lending to property developers and land speculators under Mr Fingleton.
This compared with a €243 million loss for 2008, Mr Fingleton’s last full year as chief executive after 37 years running the lender.
“The losses reflect unprecedented levels of impairment on our loan book which gave rise to losses on a massive scale,” said the society’s chairman, Danny Kitchen when the results were published.
Gerry McGinn, Mr Fingleton’s successor at Irish Nationwide, said the building society had engaged in “highly unusual” lending where, in a substantial number of cases, it lent more than 100 per cent of the value of land and took a share of the profit when it was sold on in a rising property market.