Mr. Martin McGuinness:

In the Deputy's first question, she referenced the Executive. At no stage was the Executive involved in the detail of any of this. The only real conversation members of the Executive — at that stage, it was a five-party coalition — would have had was when it had its Ministers attend the meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council. During the course of such meetings, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, gives an economic assessment of where things are at regarding the southern economy. In addition, given that the NAMA situation was in the headlines at that stage, it was a case of reassuring the Ministers about our concerns over a fire sale.

The whole business of who would end up with the portfolio in the aftermath of a sales process was totally and absolutely in the hands of NAMA and, some might also think, the Government in the South, because NAMA was acting on its behalf. In reality, while various opinions may have been expressed by individual politicians in the North, or even individual political parties, at the end of the day I was working on the basis that the Irish Government and NAMA would be very cognisant of their responsibilities, not only to taxpayers in the South but also in terms of ensuring our economy in the North would not take a hammering from whatever sale would occur.

I accept that both considerations are there but when it became public that this short process was under way, would it have been destabilising to go back to the drawing board? One of the key issues is that it has been bundled and, with it being a short process, it could have meant that less money was received? Would this have been a destabilising force within the property sector in Northern Ireland?