Results 23,081-23,100 of 34,780 for speaker:Seán Fleming
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: I am not talking about the detailed discussions. The board discussed the process every month, but Mr. Daly said that it was bespoke. He indicated that NAMA had designed a specific mechanism to deal with this process from the beginning. Did the board see it?
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Will the witnesses send us that document? We do not mind that it was not recorded at the board meeting, but presumably some paper had to come to the board that allowed it to discuss the matter. We look forward to receiving the document. My concern is that the process changed from month to month in terms of who was involved, who pulled out, three others being invited, two not showing and...
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Not the board. Your committee.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: We asked the question. If a significant risk is raised at board level first, it does not go to the risk committee at all. Surely Mr. Ellingham should have seen this significant risk and told the board that he would revert to it with the considered view of the risk committee, having taken advice from that committee's members as well as external advisers. Does Mr. Ellingham get me?
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: I would go so far as to say that there is no point in having these lovely pages in NAMA's fancy report about all of its committees, including the risk management committee, if something gets referred to the board first and the committees have no involvement in the matter. Mr. Ellingham gets my point. I seek clarification of a couple of points in the opening statement. I will not repeat...
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Between the two parties remaining, but did they know that it was a two rather than a three horse race? In fact, PIMCO had never made a bid.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Therefore, there were two bids, one of which was above the minimum price-----
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Let us be clear because this is the essence of the matter. There was one bid on the table which was above the minimum price. NAMA was clearly rejecting the bid made by Fortress because it did not make the minimum price.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Fine, but where was the competition? NAMA had one bid on the table which was above the minimum price. I do not see where there was competitive tension when there was only one bidder that had met NAMA's minimum price. I would accept it if there were two or three bidders, but, in reality, the bid made by Fortress had been discounted as not being a real bid because it had not reach the...
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Two.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: By what percentage did it bid above the reserve price?
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: By what percentage?
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: I can tell Mr. Ellingham. It was by less than 1%.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: By less than 1%
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: Yes, but it was above it by less than 1%. There is no suggestion being made. Can NAMA guarantee that Cerberus had had no indication of what the reserve price was? To come in just a fraction above the minimum price, by 1%, is-----
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: The issue of advisers has come up on a number of occasions. I have a question for the risk committee. I am sure Lazard would have dealt with it, but would NAMA have known who the advisers to each of the bidders were? Would that have been part of the bidding process, knowing who was advising who and also the structures of the companies with which NAMA was dealing? In other words, would...
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: How would NAMA have known?
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: In other words, Cerberus, PIMCO and Fortress notified NAMA who their advisers were.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: It does not matter.
- Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed) (18 Oct 2016)
Seán Fleming: We are talking about good practice and ethics. Would it not have been good practice for NAMA to know the identities of the full team of advisers for Cerberus? NAMA knew the identities of the advisers for PIMCO. Essentially, it only found out at the last minute, when it was asking Cerberus to sign an undertaking, that Tughans and Brown Rudnick were also advisers to Cerberus. Did that not...