Bobby Aylward (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Mr. Rowntree was before the committee last week and I found him to be open, transparent and forward in his views. He was the first witness to come before us who was transparent and willing to answer every question we asked. However, NAMA has rubbished the evidence he gave to the committee. He said he had been a member of the NIAC and that what he termed "sensitive information" was put in front of him every day. As an outside member, Mr. Cushnahan was the other one. He as good as said that that information could be construed and used afterwards, if one were to be in Mr. Cushnahan's situation where he was advising six or seven people who owned 50% of the portfolio in Northern Ireland. He said it was not hard to identify individual debtors from what they were getting at those meetings. They were not allowed to bring that information out of the meeting. It was given to them at those advisory meetings and then taken back before they left, but he said it would not be difficult for any individual to identify debtors and assets from the information they were getting. The witnesses are saying, however, that Mr. Rowntree or Mr. Cushnahan had no information whatsoever that they could bring forward for their own benefit. We hoped it would not turn out that way but that will have to be proven. Have the witnesses any comment on what Mr. Rowntree said? In his evidence, he was adamant that what they were shown at meetings could be used to identify individual debtors and assets that they were speaking about. However, the witnesses state categorically that no information was given to those two men that could have a bearing on any outcome of it. That is a contradiction.