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

A lot of what has been said in the statements here has been to the effect that it was a messy bit of a portfolio, including lots of little properties around the place in Northern Ireland. It was suggested, "It will be a lot of trouble to manage them; let us get rid of them, even if we have to take a loss," to allow NAMA to concentrate on its core activity in dealing with the rest of its portfolio. That has come through from what has been said. The expressions "easier to manage" and "concentrate our resources" were used. It was kind of said it had nuisance value and was trouble and that NAMA wanted to try to get rid of it. That came through in both opening statements. However, only 50% of the property was in Northern Ireland. Did NAMA not consider splitting it between the properties in Northern Ireland and those in regional England? I note that 6% of it was elsewhere in the rest of the world and that there was a little bit of it in Dublin and some in commuter belts and urban centres. Of the portfolio, 3% was in the Republic of Ireland and 4% in London. I understand what Mr. Daly says about the Northern Ireland economy, but was any consideration given to splitting some of the portfolio on a geographical basis based on the underlying assets? The prospects for growth in London, Dublin and the rest of the Republic of Ireland might have been higher than in Northern Ireland. Was it the largest job lot sale to that point?