Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 224: To ask the Minister for Finance the rationale for the recently reported increases in remuneration for the National Asset Management Agency Board members; the new remuneration arrangements; and the annual cost of remunerating the board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12687/10]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In my reply to a Parliamentary Question of 10 March 2010 concerning remuneration of members of the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA), I indicated that, under section 21 (1) and 25 (9) of the NAMA Act 2009, I had approved the following fee arrangements. Chairperson - all inclusive fee of €170,000 per annum on the understanding that the incumbent is available without restriction. Chairperson of Credit Committee - all inclusive fee of €150,000 per annum on the understanding that the incumbent works no less than 3 to 4 days a week. Ordinary Board Members (5 remaining board members) - fee of €50,000 per annum. Chair of other Committees - fee of €10,000 per annum in addition to Ordinary Board Member fee subject to a maximum of one per member.

The total cost in 2010 is therefore likely to be €470,000 and an additional amount dependent upon how many sub-committees are established by the Board of NAMA. However, given that board members can receive a maximum of one fee for Chairing another Committee and given the fact that neither the Chair nor the Chair of the credit Committee can receive this extra fee as their main fee is all-inclusive the maximum extra cost of payments to Chairs of other Committees is €50,000.

Originally, the fees for the Chairperson and Ordinary Board Members had been set at €100,000 and €38,000 respectively when the Board was appointed on 22 December 2009. Following discussions with the Chairperson and the Chief Executive of the National Treasury Management Agency last month and in light of the workload of the Board's operations over the initial period of its operation I revised these fees from a current date.

I further indicated that in setting the fees account was taken of the critical importance of the work to be undertaken by the Board and the fact that its workload will be excessive by normal standards in the first year of operation. I also indicated that I intended to review the fees after a year.