Though this might appear to be Sod's Law at work, Tony McNulty's candour was a tacit admission that the financial services industry, which has a significant presence locally, is struggling to withstand the recession.

This is borne out by the way in which the Government announced details of the running of the newly-nationalised banks on the day that the eurozone officially entered a state of recession, and that another sharp increase in UK bankruptcy figures.

It is logical that the Treasury should represent the interests of taxpayers on an "arm's length" basis, given the number of troubled financial institutions now being subsidised with public money.

A decision beneficial to one firm maybe detrimental to another when the over-riding objective is for every bank to reimburse the Exchequer at the earliest possible opportunity while also ensuring that the element of competitions protects the interests of consumers.

The difficulty, from the Government's perspective, is that the public's expectations have changed since nationalisation.

They want the banks to work for them, not the other way round. And now they have a stake in such firms, they want the banks to be more pragmatic over, for example, loans to small businesses and don't know whether to complain to themselves, their MP or their bank manager when an application is rejected.

As such, the Government will have to be at its persuasive best if it is to convince the public that the way forward is to "manage the taxpayer's investments, not to manage the banks".

When so many people – including bankers – are losing their jobs, there will be incredulity if senior executives are now rewarded handsomely for restoring stability to the financial system.

The flipside, however, is that talented people, with the expertise now required, do not come cheaply. It is a conundrum that Ministers might find difficult to avoid now that the rules of banking have changed so fundamentally.