Mr Charles Haughey told the tribunal that he did not think there was much confidentiality in bank affairs these days as compared to the 1970s.
Mr John Coughlan SC, for the tribunal, referred to an AIB memo of an interview dated March 3rd, 1975, between Mr Des Traynor of Guinness & Mahon and bank officials, which recorded that Mr Haughey had given permission in a letter for the bank to disclose to Mr Tray nor information about Mr Haughey's bank accounts.
Mr Coughlan asked if he remembered if he had discussions with Mr Traynor about the overall situation relating to the AIB accounts and the Northern Bank Finance Corporation situation. Mr Haughey said it seemed clear that he was not at this particular meeting. Mr Traynor was there by himself.
Mr Coughlan said the letter consented to the bank discussing Mr Haughey's affairs with Mr Traynor. "I think that would only be a formality," Mr Haughey said. "It seems to me it was the sort of formality the bank would look for to protect themselves as it were."
Mr Coughlan said: "Or to protect the confidentiality in respect of their client?"
Mr Haughey replied: "Which perhaps existed in those days."
Mr Coughlan asked: "Are you suggesting that was the reason or there was some other reason? What confidentiality do you say does not exist; has the law changed?"
Mr Haughey replied: "I don't think there's very much confidentiality in bank affairs these days. I was just contrasting the situation then."
Mr Coughlan asked if Mr Tray nor had an overall responsibility or a supervisory role within Haughey Boland. "I think more than that. He would have been very much responsible for my financial affairs," Mr Haughey said.
Mr Coughlan asked if that changed significantly in 1969 or thereabouts when Mr Traynor moved to Guinness & Mahon.
Mr Haughey said he assumed so. The mechanical side of his affairs - or the paying-out of bills - was still conducted by Haughey Boland.
Mr Coughlan said he must have had some contact with Mr Traynor and what form did that take?
Mr Haughey replied: "I suppose it would take the normal course. He might call out to see me. I might go down to see him in his house, he wasn't too far away. Or alternatively, as you say, it may have been by telephone from time to time.
"But I'll just make a point there, he was a close personal friend at that stage. He had been my articled clerk and that was a close relationship and he assumed a very direct personal interest and responsibility for me as a person with a financial situation.
"He would know in a general way that I was indebted to AIB and that they would be inviting me to see them and discuss my affairs, sometimes trenchantly," said Mr Haughey.
Mr Haughey referred to the wording in the memo.
"The author of this memo says `the object of his visit was to ascertain how his client stood with us'. Now I am his client there, obviously, and I think those words would indicate that he was more concerned with their attitude towards me personally as bank people rather than the actual amount or the ins and outs of it, as it were."