Seanad debates

Wednesday, 6 June 2012

NAMA and Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Transparency Bill 2011: Second Stage

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Mark DalyMark Daly (Fianna Fail)

This property was not placed on the open market. How was that in the best interests of the Irish taxpayer? Could my colleague, Senator Coghlan, outline how on 16 April, a trust was set up in Jersey? A legal agreement signed in Westminster City Council shows that McAleer and Rushe had a beneficial interest in this trust. Was this to deceive the Irish taxpayer? On 21 September 2011, in a report and a press release to the market, British Land said:

We repurchased approximately 50% of the value it previously sold for in 2004. We structured a three-way deal to purchase the site from McAleer and Rushe, Bank of Ireland, with the consent of NAMA", [ I ask Senator Coghlan to note]. This acquisition has already performed very well. Since purchased the valuers have increased the site value by 52%.

This is in one year. Does this tell us it was undersold? Does this tell us that the market value was achieved? It most certainly tells us that. I could get no answer from either Bank of Ireland or NAMA - as to why McAleer and Rushe when they went into that agreement with the consent of Bank of Ireland and with the consent of NAMA, were profit sharing, which means that the money achieved first day was not the entire market value. Was Bank of Ireland aware of this profit-sharing agreement? Was NAMA aware? I do not know the answer.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.