Josepha Madigan (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCarthy for his forbearance thus far. I know that this is difficult, but the committee has a duty to probe the report a little further. We appreciate his patience.

Mr. McCarthy's report suggests the sale of assetsen masseresulted in significant losses for the National Asset Management Agency. We know this in hindsight. From my perspective, it seems there is general acceptance that more money would have been made through a medium to long-term sales process. How can we be certain that is the case? How can one arrive at that conclusion? I seek a little assurance on that point.

It is my understanding that the key information missing is that there were no property valuations in respect of NAMA. Does Mr. McCarthy believe this was the most detrimental element that was missing? Is it his view that the properties were undervalued? If that is the case, on what does he base that view in the absence of figures? In other words, how can he be confident that the properties were undervalued when there are no valuations available? I ask about this because we are talking about a loss of £190 million and I would like to know how we could possibly have saved the taxpayer money. I seek some clarification on that point.