Sharon Keogan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will talk about the NAMA issue again and the management of Project Eagle. This report has taken seven years to complete, and while its findings exhibit ambiguity, they nonetheless highlight significant concerns regarding the way this country addresses conflicts of interest and transparency, especially in substantial financial transactions such as those involved Project Eagle. Although the report concludes there were no significant deficiencies in the board’s management of the situation involving its former adviser, Mr. Frank Cushnahan, who was aiding PIMCO, one of potential purchasers of the portfolio, this incident ought to serve as a critical wake-up call. It is imperative we revise our legislation concerning the management of conflicts of interest. We require clearer and more effective legal frameworks to eliminate the issues associated with revolving doors of employment and financial interests. All too frequently, we observe individuals transitioning frequently between various roles in Government, quangos, NGOs and the private sector.

Moreover, the protracted duration taken to release this report is particularly troubling. There is a pressing need for a simplification of the procedures governing the compilation of such reports. Often, the extended timeline for their completion and publication allows the individuals and organisations involved to move on without accountability.

I urge the Minister for Finance to provide clarification on certain ambiguous responses presented in the report. For instance, how can the report assert that Project Eagle secured a fair price for its portfolio, considering the Comptroller and Auditor General’s 2016 report which estimated that NAMA had undersold by approximately €313 million in today’s currency? Furthermore, why does the report not address the allegations made by former TD Mick Wallace indicating that the final buyer of the portfolio, Cerberus, had made payments to an insider at NAMA? Will there be any comprehensive investigation into these allegations or will we be left with another seven years for additional vague and ambiguous statements?