Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

There has been quite a bit of media coverage around the NBP in recent months, particularly before Christmas. It has mainly focused on missed targets, on how very little of the investors’ own money has gone into the NBP, on how it is funded, on the complicated corporate structure and so on. The big takeaway was about the expectation that €175 million in equity was to be put in by those who won the tender. We were told that this had been promised. The expectation was that this equity would be put in but in fact, there has been an equity investment of just €98 million so far. That usually means the purchase of shares. In effect, this boils down to the fact that just €2 million of their own money has been put into what is the largest contract in the history of the State. That was not my expectation. I do not think that anybody else had that expectation either. In essence, the money in entails lots of high-cost loans and at best no equity, while the money out entails fees and interest from those loans. The Minister of State has just confirmed that was exactly what was expected by those who signed the contract. It is certainly not what was conveyed here in the Dáil. A contribution of €223 million, which was the total amount via loans and not share purchase, was touted prior to the contract being awarded. The figure so far is €98 million.

I want to move on. Of the €38 million in fees paid to investors - and this has to do with when the contract was awarded - €32.7 million was paid to NBI Bidco LLC, which was controlled by Granahan McCourt. It was set up just a week before the contract was signed. Even if it had been permitted to recoup the cost of the bid, how was it that a company which was set up a week beforehand got to claim that money? They clearly had not incurred such a cost. I would like a response to that, even if it is later on in writing.

The Department and NBI insist that Granahan McCourt controls NBI and that control is determined by voting rights. This may be true, but the contract itself states that control is determined according to who has the necessary voting rights, holds the necessary investment or is entitled to the necessary percentage of dividends. The threshold for control is set at 30% of the contract. While Mr. McCourt may well have 30% of the voting rights of NBI, as the Department claims, he certainly does not own 30% of the shares. That has been clearly demonstrated by the way this is funded. Does he actually control NBI? If so, and if it is only based on voting rights, why does the contract suggest otherwise? I refer the Minister of State to page 42 of the definitions in relation to that. Why was a multimillion euro State contract given to Mr. McCourt, whose private investment firm, Granahan McCourt Capital LLC, owns just 2.7% of NBI? Just €54,674 of the money Granahan McCourt Capital LLC invested was by way of buying shares, whereas 99.1% was via debt. I am still not satisfied with the responses that we have heard in that regard today.

What does the contract say about the investors' obligations when it comes to capitalising NBI? Does it allow shareholders to provide capital in the form of loans at 12% compound interest? Is that the kind of thing that is specified? I have asked for it to be published to the greatest degree possible, and ideally the whole lot of it. The Minister of State has said he is looking into that at the moment. However, it is important that we can see just exactly what was signed up to, so that we can evaluate that ourselves.

Finally, the key issue is whether the consortium can crash out at any time. If so, what does that look like? What do they take with them?

What is the potential risk to the State? We need a response to that. I would be very happy to get that answer in writing because there are a lot of things to be caught up on after this debate.

See this speech in context