Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Mr. McDonagh has explained that loads of times. I am just trying to get my head around something because we will be writing up a report in due course. Tied in with this matter is the information on page 33 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which uses the heading "Internal rate of return - debtor level". Again, there is a very specific point being made. At the end of 2010, NAMA had over 750 debtor connections in its loan portfolio, and then so many exited. It is all set out in the report. The examination team from the Comptroller and Auditor General's office applied the internal rate of return methodology. The witnesses can read this. The approach is based on what NAMA paid for the loans and the actual cash receipts generated by the connections before exiting NAMA. The weighted average internal rate of return and so on was approximately 3.4%. That is what the examination found. The final sentence is: "NAMA's view is that it would be more appropriate to compute the internal rate of return by reference to the market value of the loans at acquisition and not what NAMA paid for them." NAMA paid €31.8 billion but the market value was only €26.2 billion. If the market value is used, it obviously looks as if the agency is getting a better return. Is that not right, or am I being foolish?