Mr. John McDonnell:

We would not have audited the fair value of those loans because the bank were not allowed ... the bank had accounted for these as loans in receivables, they were not allowed to fair-value them. That's the first point. Secondly, when we audited the 2010 accounts we would have had to audit the gain or loss on the disposal to NAMA and as part of that audit procedures, we would have looked at the amount of which NAMA paid the bank for the transfer. But, as I said, NAMA dictated that. The bank did not have any real influence in determining what that price was. It was set by legislation. So, in this instance NAMA would say we're paying €5.6 billion for the loans and that's what NAMA paid and we would have ensured that that's what NAMA paid. We wouldn't have audited the NAMA calculation because there was no ... we didn't have the basis first off for the NAMA calculation, that was what NAMA did and, secondly, it wasn't particularly relevant because NAMA was going to pay what NAMA was going to pay and they paid €5.6 billion. And, we would have ensured they paid €5.6 billion.