Results 30,641-30,660 of 32,983 for speaker:Paschal Donohoe

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Mr. Curtin was one of the people who withdrew from the meeting. Is that correct?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Who was the individual who withdrew?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: It was Mr. Declan McCourt. What bank was Mr. McCourt involved with at that stage?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Bank of Ireland and Anglo Irish Bank were two of the banks foremost in supplying investment to large property deals and large construction activities at that time. Did it not occur to anyone during the previous two meetings that their banks might have been involved in looking to secure funding for the deal if it was agreed by the board? It is not only a matter of an actual conflict of...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: The were on the boards, though. They may have been shareholders.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: It appears extraordinary to me that if a conflict of interest was identified in that meeting, the potential for a conflict of interest was not identified at other meetings. I want to focus on how this happened. All this took place over the telephone. When these people referred to a conflict of interest, what did they do? Did they hang up?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: I thank Mr. McCarthy for that clarification. They stayed in the meeting. That is a helpful clarification. According to the minutes of the meeting at paragraph 2.1, the chairman drew attention to the fact that he and the chief executive had been advised by Mr. McNamara at 8.30 p.m. the previous night that Mr. McNamara had been in discussions with Bank of Ireland and Anglo Irish Bank to...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: The individuals who were directors of those banks stayed for the entire meeting. Is that the case?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: That was the legal advice that came back despite the fact that the individuals in question were directors of the banks.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: It was believed there was no conflict of interest.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: I am incredulous. I can only speculate but Mr. FitzPatrick and Mr. Bradshaw may well have been owners of shares in the bank. They may well have been in receipt of performance-related payments from the bank due to the roles they were performing. It is certainly feasible that they could have benefited indirectly from the go-ahead for this project. I am not saying that they did. I am being...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Okay, we will come back to that point. The letter dated 12 October was to Ms Moylan, a member of the board, and included a figure of €220 million. Ms Moylan attended a meeting some eight days later and the discussion was on a figure ranging from €275 million to €375 million. Did she ask why there was such a variation?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: I understand those points, but, respectfully, that is different from the question I am asking. I have a letter from Mr. Moloney, chief executive of the board, to Ms Moylan, including a figure of €220 million. In the minutes of a board meeting, attended by Mr. Moloney, there is a figure ranging from €275 million to €375 million. There is a gigantic difference between...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Ms Moylan says the figure mentioned is a typographical error. What should it have been?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Ms Moylan has said the figure varied. The letter including the figure of €220 million was dated 12 October. I will get to the minutes of the meeting of 24 October in a moment. The letter to the Department mentions a figure of €220 million, but the board discussed a figure as high as €375 million. The value did not vary by that much. There was no change in plot...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Okay, but even if there were variations, the letter to the Department stated a figure in the region of €220 million, yet there was a discussion based on a figure of up to €375 million. That is one hell of a variation.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: We have been around this issue and Ms Moylan is clear on my line of questioning. I accept that she has given me an answer, but I challenge it, as I still want to understand why there was such a difference. As she has pointed to the meeting of 24 October, I will move on to discuss what happened at that meeting. That meeting took place at 8 a.m. At this stage, we should remind everybody who...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: I refer to the actual minutes of the board from that meeting, namely, document R909, and wish to focus on section 3.1, because this gives the main reference to the IGB site. It states: "The chief executive briefed the board on the confidential negotiations which he had undertaken with a developer who had indicated an intention to bid for that site". At that stage, who was the chief executive?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: Did Mr. Moloney indicate that anybody else was involved in those negotiations?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 77 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Dublin Docklands Development Authority (Resumed) (2 May 2013)

Paschal Donohoe: In the meeting he indicated that he had been directly involved in negotiations with a developer------