Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We are now in public session to deal with No. 7 on our agenda, NAMA's policy regarding the retention of contemporaneous notes in relation to the preparation of board minutes. In the course of the committee's examination of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on NAMA's sale of Project Eagle, the committee had sought a considerable amount of information from NAMA. We are very grateful to NAMA for the material supplied to the committee to date. One particular item requested was a copy of the contemporaneous notes in the format taken during the meeting that were used in the subsequent preparation of the minutes of NAMA board meetings held on 12 December 2013 and 8 January 2014. NAMA responded to the committee that once NAMA board minutes are adopted by the board members, they are the official record of that particular meeting. As a result, the board secretary’s contemporaneous notes of the meeting are transitory records and are not retained. As I mentioned at our last private meeting, I was surprised by this considering the importance of the meetings and the fact that the board was considering the sale of assets worth £1.3 billion. For that reason, we have asked for NAMA to put on the record at this meeting its policy regarding the retention of contemporaneous notes in respect of the preparation of board minutes. I will allow for some short questions at the end but I ask that members do not drift into other topics today and that they be very brief. This session will be over within one hour at the very latest. It may not go that far but I will be closing the meeting at 11.45 a.m. if it is not concluded by then. There is one specific item and we should be well able to do our business in the time allowed.

I welcome the following representatives from NAMA: Mr Frank Daly, chairman, and Mr. Brendan McDonagh, chief executive.

I remind members, witnesses and those in the Public Gallery to turn off all mobile phones. I advise the witnesses that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving the evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of that evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given. They are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. Members of the committee are reminded of the provisions of Standing Order 186 to the effect that the committee shall refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such a policy. Finally, members are reminded of the long-standing ruling of the Chair to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I invite Mr. Daly to make his statement.