Professor Patrick Honohan:

I suppose he is saying basically ... this is, like, November 2009, that house prices and that property prices continued to go down. So, in that sense, he could have paid less. Now does this matter? No, because what was worrying me before NAMA - or in the early stages of NAMA - was that he'd pay so much that the bank shareholders would come out with something actually ... and more than they should have. But actually it was down below that - the bank shareholders were wiped out. And so it didn't matter whether it was the ... NAMA was paying the money or the NTMA, through their pension reserve fund, was paying the money. It was all money - the State was the net provider of the capital. So the NAMA purchases ... if he'd paid €10 billion less, the State would just have had to pay €10 billion more out of its NTMA resources. So it doesn't have that effect.