David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I am willing to accept that the review took place. I am not disputing that and I want to be fair to the individual who carried out the review. One thing we are trying to achieve in this process is that any review is properly documented in the future. We are not in dispute. I am not accusing anybody of saying they did a review that was not done but unfortunately the Comptroller and Auditor General cannot report that a review actually took place, or what that review did or did not, because there are no documents. Lessons can be learned and that is the important thing in all of this.

I will move on to the assignment agreement. This is the second important issue in the report. Paragraph 3.36 states: "After the July 2010 licence agreement was signed, FeedHenry Ltd endeavoured to attract the level of investment that would help trigger the assignment of the IP." Policy can change depending on a whole range of factors, but here the policy was that the equity to be received by the institute should be reduced by 15%. The paragraph continues: "In November 2010, the company proposed changes to the terms of the July agreement."

Mr. McCarthy might be able to confirm my understanding that the company contacted Waterford IT in order to change its equity.