Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I strongly suggest that making a decision on the terms of reference before the information that has been referred to in the House is available does not best serve the public interest. We have seen other commissions of investigation, and I am sure other Members of the House can talk about them, whose terms of reference were so broad and sweeping with everything bar the kitchen sink thrown in to such an extent that the people tasked with carrying out the commissions' work found it very hard to fulfil their remit within a reasonable timeframe.

People who have asked questions about NAMA are to be commended. It is proper that answers to the different questions that have been asked be given but a commission of investigation could go on for years or be so broad as to be almost unmanageable, as we have seen previously. If we have to have a commission of investigation, it is much better for it to be focused and tight and concentrate on the key issues. I have been involved as a witness and complainant in commissions of investigation into the planning process and saw long periods of inquiry into matters that in the end yielded relatively few outcomes for the public but ended up making lawyers very rich.

There is serious questions to be addressed here. At the moment, the Committee of Public Accounts is attempting to do this and has offered to make a number of answers available. The Labour Party and I did not support the establishment of NAMA. NAMA was a fait accomplithat was brought about by the Fianna Fáil Government of the time, specifically by the then Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan. It was structured in such a way as to be effectively out of bounds in respect of politicians' involvement other than the remit of the Minister for Finance of the day in terms of that Minister's powers under the National Asset Management Agency Act. The second issue, which was referred to by a previous speaker, was to ensure that developers would be unable to acquire their loans by the back door. NAMA was given a very detailed and extensive framework in terms of its governance to limit what could happen. At the end of the day, NAMA was effectively the State's bad bank vehicle which was designed to take bad loans off the books of our banks, which were in a state of collapse, and secure the maximum amount of money for the Irish taxpayer. It has not yet completed this job but many taxpayers in Ireland would like to see NAMA maximise its recovery of money.

I have not heard any argument that would explain at this point in time - perhaps there might be one after the report of the Committee of Public Accounts appears - what kind of commission of investigation is being talked about. I think what I have just heard is probably more to do with the fact that there will be an election in Northern Ireland than the argument that this House should sit down and work out what would be the terms of reference.

See this speech in context