Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

They are afraid to initiate an investigation for fear that something may be unearthed. The corollary of the point I am making is that if there is no concern, why would the Government be afraid to initiate some form of independent investigation? I ask the Minister of State to bear in mind that investigations are already going on. The Stormont finance committee, the UK National Crime Agency and authorities in the United States are investigating these matters. Even though NAMA was established by the Dáil, no concern is being expressed by the Government here. There is a pretence that everything is fine, but I assure the Minister of State that everything is not fine. The Government needs to accept that it has a responsibility in this regard.

The Minister for Finance is passing this off by saying that NAMA is independent. While I accept that NAMA is independent in terms of how it conducts its affairs on a daily basis, I remind the House that section 14 of the legislation under which NAMA was established clearly and explicitly gives the Minister for Finance the power to direct NAMA in exceptional circumstances. I thought the discovery of a fixers' fee of £7 million in a bank account somewhere would qualify as an exceptional circumstance. Equally, I would have thought that the bundling of 850 properties in Northern Ireland and elsewhere as a single portfolio would surely limit the capital value of those assets. How many people or entities were capable of bidding for this portfolio? We ended up with just three bidders. PIMCO pulled out, or was instructed to pull out. We then had two bidders and Cerberus ended up as the preferred bidder. With all due respect, having three people expressing interest in something and ending up with one of them purchasing it does not constitute a very competitive tendering process, to say the least. The bundling was too large. It should have been subdivided to include more entities that would have had the capability of raising the number of millions of euro needed to purchase part of the portfolio.

It is madness that NAMA is in such a hurry to commit hara-kiri and wind itself up in advance of the general election to show that it is creating profit. Its motivation is to be seen to finish out as quickly as possible. I am in no hurry for NAMA to wind up. Equally, I do not want it to stay around forever. I want it to capitalise the best value for taxpayers. That does not simply involve NAMA showing a profit on the loans it is disposing of, especially given that it purchased them at a huge discount. If it makes a profit, that does not mean the taxpayer is off the hook for the gaping holes that were left in balance sheets elsewhere. NAMA, in its headlong rush to wind itself up, is applauding itself and saying it has made a profit. It made a profit on something that was already discounted. I suggest that if the Project Eagle assets had been subdivided into smaller groupings, more entities would have been interested in portions of it. Any suggestion to the contrary is unacceptable to me. When we talk about value for money for the taxpayer and about NAMA disposing of assets and realising their value, we must always ensure that integrity is at the heart of the decisions that are made. Surely concern must be raised at some level on foot of the allegations made by Deputy Wallace and subsequently by others.

It seems that NAMA, which was established in this House, is not co-operating with an investigation into its sales process that is taking place elsewhere - I refer to what is happening in Northern Ireland before the Stormont finance committee and the UK National Crime Agency - because the authorities here in the Republic have decided to wash their hands of the need to see whether the sales process or the purchasing process was compromised. Either way, it is incumbent on us here to insist that we delve into the murky area that seems to have been exposed by the allegations that have been made. If the Minister of State has time, he should tell the Minister for Finance to read section 14 of the NAMA Act, which gives the Minister the power to deal with this issue rather than washing his hands of it. He can instruct NAMA to co-operate with the investigations in Northern Ireland. Mr. Daly and Mr. McDonagh could get on a train heading north and co-operate, just as they have appeared before the Committee of Public Accounts. We need to state honestly that a commission of investigation with substantial powers of inquiry and investigation is required to get to the heart of the matter. That would deal with the idea that it is acceptable to hide behind commercial sensitivity. I refer to the manner in which those who appear before the Committee of Public Accounts on behalf of NAMA start by saying they cannot discuss this issue because it is commercially sensitive. A commission of investigation could hear evidence in private to overcome the issue of commercial sensitivity and could issue findings on the question of whether this purchasing process was compromised.

The motion before the House should be taken on board and embraced. The Government should not try to hide behind the falsehood that the Minister does not have the power to instruct NAMA to co-operate with investigations in the North. More importantly from our perspective here, we should set up a commission of investigation to ensure NAMA has no option other than to co-operate with that commission and with other agencies inside and outside this State. We should be upfront about this issue. We cannot ignore the possibility that the taxpayer could be left on the hook at the end of the day because this process was not as robust as NAMA said it was, or as the Government thinks it may have been. We simply do not know whether that is the case. A proper commission of investigation may or may not find out, but at least we will know we did our duty in this Chamber to ensure the integrity of the process was upheld. During the debate on the establishment of NAMA, those who told us that it was a bailout for builders and bankers said that if they were elected, they would put manners on NAMA. Some of them stood next to posters saying that they would get rid of NAMA. The Tánaiste was photographed next to posters suggesting that NAMA would be disbanded. What has happened subsequently? Nothing. Not one dot or comma has been removed from the NAMA Act. No effort has been made by this Government to make NAMA more accountable. It is pretending that section 14 of the NAMA Act, which is quite explicit, does not exist. The Minister for Finance waltzed into this House and said he is unable to instruct NAMA, even though it is in the Act that he can. More importantly, he should instruct NAMA.

If there is not a section already in the Act, the Minister should introduce an amendment to ensure that he can instruct NAMA because this deserves scrutiny. We must ensure that when assets that are owned by the taxpayers of this country are sold, the integrity of that sales process cannot be called into question. The Government must do the honest thing and set up a commission of investigation that has the power to investigate without being inhibited by commercial sensitivities and client confidentiality. The people deserve to know that when assets are being disposed of on their behalf, the sales process is not compromised and that they are getting full value for money. I commend the motion and urge Government Members to read the Act and accept that they have the power to investigate or if they do not, that they have the moral responsibility and duty to change the law and to insist that an investigation is carried out.

See this speech in context