Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Yes. We have agreed to publish it. We have not come to it but we will in a moment. It is in the correspondence list. I do not think that was the one list. We will deal with it in a moment.

The next category is B - correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers and follow-up to Committee of Public Accounts meetings and other items for publishing. A number of items were held over from last week's meeting. We will continue to hold them over until we get an opportunity to read them. When we have read them all in detail, we will be able to move through them very quickly when the time comes. I am holding over all the items of correspondence previously held over. I read it out on a second occasion the last time so I will move on to the newer items of correspondence.

No. 1620 B is correspondence received from Mr. Derek Moran, Secretary General, Department of Finance, dated 8 October 2018, providing the following information requested by the committee: additional information relating to cash holdings in NAMA, the impact of negative interest rates, and an update relating to the case before the courts regarding the IBRC liquidation. In respect of the special liquidation of IBRC, the Department is defending the proceedings and confirms that a comprehensive defence to these proceedings will be filed within two weeks. We want to verify that this happens when the time comes. The other item concerned negative interest rates. The Department did not specifically deal with it. It spoke about early access to dividends but the point is covered. We will note and publish that.

No. 1622 B is correspondence received from Mr Ciarán Breen, director of the State Claims Agency, dated 9 October 2018, providing information requested by the committee regarding Thalidomide litigation and the number of outstanding cases. We can note and publish this. We should also note that at the meeting of 12 July 2018, correspondence from the Irish Thalidomide Association was considered and there may have been a suggestion that Mr Breen's evidence was not accurate. In his letter, Mr. Breen states that his evidence was accurate. If further clarification is required, we will be able to deal with it when we engage with the State Claims Agency at our meeting on 8 November. I note that in the letter he sent to us, he did not receive a copy of the letter we received from the Irish Thalidomide Association and, essentially, was replying in the dark, so we want to send it on to the agency.

I am informed that due to the wonderful data protection legislation and so on because that correspondence was marked "Private and Confidential", we need to get permission from the Irish Thalidomide Association to forward it to the State Claims Agency. I presume that was their assumption when they sent it to us but it seems we must verify that consent. That letter was dated 12 July. We need to get it to the State Claims Agency as urgently as possible if they give consent and if they do not, we can do no more about it. I expect that they will but I make the point that we must follow the process.

The next correspondence is No. 1630 from Ms Mary Lawlor, NAMA, dated 10 October 2018, providing the information requested by the committee at a previous meeting. One was a breakdown of the 8,000 units directly funded by NAMA categorised according to occupancy status, social-affordable and private housing developments. That relates to 8,113 houses. We asked for a note on the sale of houses to Cerberus that were then sold back to the Housing Agency. They have given a comprehensive reply saying that it was done on market valuations; there is a note on the meeting between NAMA and officials from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government held in May 2018 in relation to the development of a new housing project, which we note; and a note on the 7,000 units offered to local authorities including a breakdown by local authority and the reasons given for taking up the units available. That is a matter that has been ventilated on many occasions.

Two items in the letter are of particular interest. The most important question we asked related to note 5. We asked for the €24 billion sale of underlying asset with a geographic breakdown of where the purchasers were located, namely what country they are from. They said they were not in a position to answer and would reply in due course. We must mark that as "Urgent" and follow it up. The next item we must follow up is one of the primary items for which we wrote to NAMA, namely Project Nantes. Was it an off-market loan sale? NAMA says:

The loan sale was one constituent part of the board-approved higher refinancing target which was set for the debtor connection.

Having set the target, NAMA did not specify how it was to be achieved. Therefore, provided Avestus met or exceeded the board approved target, it was free to adopt a variety of monetisation strategies, including the sale of the secured properties and/or a refinancing of the loans.

We asked why was there no publicity following the loan sale, from either Avestus or Clairvue-Nantes.

The refinancing target and exit strategy agreed with Avestus was a confidential arrangement between the debtor and NAMA.

We asked whether NAMA could confirm the portfolio was sold for €26.6 million, with a par value of €352 million. This was one of the fundamental questions asked at that meeting. The response is:

NAMA confirms that the residual portfolio was sold for €26.6 million, with a par value of €352 million. The cash realised by the loan sale was only one constituent part of the overall cash amount received from the acquired Avestus loan and security realisations. The total amount of cash received by NAMA from the overall debtors’ acquired loans was a multiple of the residual loan sale.

NAMA has not given the answer to the question we asked, full stop. We must go back. The main issue is that we asked about that specifically and are none the wiser about the par value of the €352 million and the total realisation that was achieved on that. More worrying, we asked for a note on review of section 172 declaration, which relates to there being no conflict of interest between the people involved, in respect of Project Nantes. The letter states: "NAMA is undertaking a legal review and will revert to the Committee in due course." We found it extraordinary that it had never done a detailed examination on that. It is something that the Comptroller and Auditor General highlighted in the past. All those items must be sent back to NAMA. There may be further correspondence on this but we want all those items to be followed up. The last ones to which we did not get a reply are very significant. Some are on their way but we need comprehensive replies. NAMA is nearly approaching the end of its work and we, as the Committee of Public Accounts, want to do our job by ensuring all those questions as answered and followed up.

No. 1631 B is from Mr. Michael Nolan, CEO, Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, dated 10 October 2018 providing information requested by the committee in respect of excess toll payments. We will note and publish this.

No. 1633 B is from Mr. Mick Long, director of corporate services, Office of Public Works, dated 11 October 2018 providing information requested by the committee for our meeting last week. We discussed this at the meeting of 11 October and we are formally noting it today.

No. 1634 is from Mr. Aidan O'Driscoll, Secretary General, Department of Justice and Equality, dated 10 October 2018 providing the note requested by the committee regarding implementation of change in the Irish Prison Service, which we will note and publish this. Much of that might be relevant to the justice committee.

No. 1635 B is also from Mr Aidan O'Driscoll, Secretary General, Department of Justice and Equality, dated 10 October 2018 in relation to the site acquisition for three new Garda stations in Clonmel, County Tipperary, Sligo and Cork, which we note and publish.

No.1636 B is from Mr. Derek Moran, Secretary General, Department of Finance, dated 11 October 2018 providing the review requested by the Committee on the resourcing of the Tax Appeals Commission. There has been some progress on that and the Minister referred to it in his budget speech. It is out there and there has been an agreement in relation to resourcing of that organisation. We note and publish that.

No.1637 B from Ms Ann-Marie Walsh, Office of Public Works, dated 11 October 2018 providing the managing valuer's report on five historic cases on foot of a preceding submission to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. We discussed this at the meeting of 10 October and we are formally noting it today. We are only noting it and have not agreed to publish this yet. We may well do so but cannot give parliamentary privilege to something which we have not taken a few minutes to look at. I have no objection in principle but there is quite a lot in it and we can agree to publish it the next day, if members wish. However, as Chairman, I must glance through it and other members have not read it in case there is an issue about which we should be concerned.