Mr. Brendan McDonagh:

Let us be very clear about this. PIMCO approached us on 10 March 2014. It told us that it was using Brown Rudnick as its adviser, that Brown Rudnick had a subcontractual arrangement with Tughans and Mr. Cushnahan and that it presumed we were aware of that. We said that we were not aware of it. For the record, we have no issue with Brown Rudnick or Tughans. They are reputable law firms. We had an issue with Mr. Cushnahan regarding the question of perception as much as anything.

PIMCO indicated to us that, now that it had made us aware of this, it would continue in the process. We said we would take this away and discuss it and we called a board meeting to discuss it. The board took the view that it was a very serious development, particularly due to the issue of the involvement of Mr. Cushnahan. We went back to PIMCO and informed it that the board viewed this as a very serious development and did not think it was tenable for PIMCO to remain in the process. In fairness, PIMCO gave us the information but the position was not tenable. PIMCO indicated it would think about this and the following day it stated that, having thought about the issue and taken on board the view of the NAMA board, it had decided to withdraw from the process. As Mr. Daly outlined in his statement, if PIMCO had not withdrawn from the process, we would have withdrawn it. Those are the facts.