Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

November. And then Mr. McDonagh, chief executive, said, "NAMA had to absorb losses arising from the impact of the 25%-30% decline in Irish property values ... right up to the end of 2013." Mr. McDonagh continues, "Essentially, therefore, the institutions [i.e., the banks] would have been paid about €22 billion by the market." In other words, if the supposed rules of the capitalist markets applied, the banks would have been given €10 billion less for the loans that you bought than you actually gave them. So, Mr. Daly, rather than a €1 billion surplus to taxpayers, would it be more accurate to say that NAMA was used to give a further €10 billion by way of a bailout to the banks on top of the €40 billion that the taxpayers were forced to put in? Or could I ask you, to put it another way, instead of your €1 billion, should it ... should you say there was a loss of €49 billion rather than a surplus of €1 billion? Would that more accurately sum up, or not, the situation?