Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 18 October 2016

Public Accounts Committee

Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed)

10:00 am

Photo of Alan KellyAlan Kelly (Tipperary, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Now it looks like that is not true. We do not know. We will find out in the wash.

Page 6 of Mr. Soffe's submission, which is all honest and fairly reflective, states, "On the sales process itself, we believe that the C&AG also failed to take account of the wider political and economic and financial implications in Northern Ireland of NAMA’s decision to sell the Eagle portfolio and the obligations on NAMA as a State agency in Dublin to be cognisant of the concerns of the Northern Ireland Executive and of the Irish Government". In fairness, this tallies with point 10 of the Comptroller and Auditor General which states, "NAMA has stated that the factors that influenced its decision to change its Northern Ireland strategy were the emergence of the loan sale option, the political and crossjurisdictional context in which it held the Northern Ireland debtor assets, and its assessment that its relationship with the Northern Ireland debtors was deteriorating". There is also a reference to the widespread lack of co-operation.

Section 10 of the National Asset Management Agency Act must be observed on one side while, on the other side, one must be cognisant of other factors, the first being political pressure. Let us be frank about that. One should remember that politicians in Northern Ireland were not under the same limitations as all of us here in the South in regard to interacting with NAMA. Diplomacy issues are high up the list. There was a lack of debtor engagement.

The fourth factor is business risk. One could probably legitimately add Brexit to that but there were other business risks. These factors are on one side and section 10 of the National Asset Management Agency Act is the other. Therefore, there was weighting taking place.

One should remember there was avolte face, going from a firesale to what was literally one bulk sale. Once this option became available, combined with the four factors I have mentioned, was it not the case that NAMA basically could not look a gift horse in the mouth and that the idea of selling in one bulk sale for the amount in question was just worthwhile, even in light of the competition associated with section 10 of the National Asset Management Agency Act with regard to getting best value? When the factors were weighed up, was this not the best option? Is this not fair to say?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.