Pádraig Ó Céidigh (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have had some involvement in business. A turnover of €50 million is significant. There is nothing illegal about an employee giving a loan to a company. It is quite unusual but it can happen. It is incredibly unusual that the board was not formally aware of it. It is also incredibly unusual that it was not reported as a note to the accounts. FRS 102 and the companies legislation require disclosures of related party transactions, which is significant particularly in the light of the clear audit opinion the association received, as I understand. Questions, therefore, need to be answered.

While I accept the evidence given by Mr. Delaney at face value and I do not seek anything personal or detailed outside of that; I am instead considering the matter overall. Mr. Conway mentioned that monthly cash flows, projections, variance analyses and so on are reported to the board by the financial controller. I find it difficult to understand the figure of €100,000 given that the FAI had a turnover of €50 million and €22.3 million in net total assets, with a profit of €2.7 million in the year in question. Could the FAI not have held off €100,000 worth of creditors for a little while? As Deputy O'Keeffe suggested, could it not have reverted to the bank to ask for another €100,000 as a short-term facility? There is a significant disjoint in that regard. While I will not challenge the former CEO, I will challenge the board on its engagement and corporate governance. Mr. Conway might comment on that and, in particular, on the fact that the board was not formally aware of the loan for two years.