Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

As I said in my initial reply, it was the compliance section of PIMCO that informed NAMA there was a potential conflict of interest. As a result of that, NAMA took action. It let it be known to PIMCO that under the new circumstances brought to its attention, it would ask PIMCO to withdraw from the sales process or, alternatively, it would not continue to negotiate with PIMCO. Either way, PIMCO was out. The Deputy asked what I did. I listened to the advice of the NAMA Chairman, who communicated with me the views of the NAMA board, and I fully agreed it should not continue with PIMCO. Since there were eight investors in all involved, the process continued and the other investors were considered. However, the lead bidder was out because of the potential conflict of interest.

On whether it is worth investigating this, the NAMA Act shows that NAMA is accountable to the Houses of the Oireachtas, specifically through the Committee of Public Accounts. I understand a meeting has been arranged and NAMA is quite willing to explain everything. Also, it has submitted all documentation in connection with this and answered all the questions presented by the relevant Northern Ireland committee investigating this on the website. In my view, NAMA acted absolutely properly. If other people acted improperly, it was on the purchasing side, not on the selling side.

See this speech in context