Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

My question relates to an element of Bord na gCon's property portfolio. According to its accounts, its fixed assets are worth €67 million. That is the net book value. Freehold land and buildings account for the biggest end of it, at €40 million. I query the decision not to allow for depreciation in that regard, given that there are buildings involved. I will ask the Comptroller and Auditor General about that in a moment. I accept that 2% depreciation is provided for in the case of leasehold buildings. The only time one of Bord na gCon's fixed assets has had its value tested by the market, it resulted in a loss of 70% - approximately two thirds - of its net book value. If Bord na gCon got €1.5 million for it, and lost €1 million on that transaction, it must have been in the books at €2.5 million. That means there was a loss of 40%. In that light, how can Bord na gCon be so confident that the assets in the rest of its balance sheet are worth what is being shown? One of the witnesses said here a little while ago that Bord na gCon has received a report suggesting that no impairment is required.

I heard that and accepted it in good faith, until I looked at the portion of its property Bord na gCon did sell, on which it incurred a 40% loss. How can the delegation explain this, given what it has not sold requires no impairment provision and everything it sold incurred a loss of 40%?