Written answers
Tuesday, 31 May 2016
Department of Finance
NAMA Operations
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
267. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, if all the debtor lists of Bank of Ireland, Allied Irish Banks, Anglo Irish Bank and the Irish Nationwide Building Society that were transferred to the agency, reported to total 800 cases, and associated loan and valuation information were leaked; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13582/16]
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
268. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, if the agency notified the Data Protection Commissioner within two weeks of becoming aware of these leaks, in accordance with the personal data security breach code of practice, as approved by the commissioner under section 2(b) of the Data Protection Acts 1988 and 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13583/16]
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
270. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, in particular, Parliamentary Question No. 70, which stated that the agency notified An Garda Síochána of the identity of the debtors in the leaked information, reported to be 800 cases, and given that a person has been convicted and that available information suggests An Garda Síochána contacted only a fraction of debtors during the three year investigation, why the agency will not give the number of affected debtors; if all affected debtors have been notified; if not, why and when they will be notified; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13585/16]
Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I propose to take Questions Nos. 267 to 270, inclusive, together.
As I advised the Deputy in my reply to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 61, 62, 63, 69 and 70 of 18 May 2016, information on the number of debtors potentially affected by the unauthorised disclosures is held by the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation which carried out the investigation which led to the prosecution of a former NAMA officer.
Contrary to the assertion made in the Deputy's question, the previous response, of 18 May 2016, did not state that the "Agency notified An Garda Siochana of the identity of the debtors in the leaked information". As previously advised, the investigation into this matter which led to criminal proceedings was undertaken by the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation. I am advised that the information collated during that investigation and the results of the searches are solely within the remit of the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation and NAMA is not privy to the information.
I am advised that on becoming aware of the potential leak of confidential data, NAMA issued High Court proceedings on 3 September 2012 in respect of the matter. Once the in camera restrictions in relation to these High Court proceedings were lifted on 12 September 2012, NAMA immediately reported the matter to An Garda Siochana and the Data Protection Commissioner on 12 September 2012 and that NAMA subsequently provided all information required by the Garda as part of their investigation.
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
269. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, in particular, Question No. 60, which stated that NAMA became aware in September 2012 and Question No. 61, which gave Autumn 2012 as the notification date while the Sunday Times article (details supplied), which appears to have triggered the investigation, was published on 2 August 2012, when the agency commenced its investigation of emails and devices, and, if not immediately, the reason why; if it was not immediately evident by mid August 2012 at the latest from e-mails that confidential information had been leaked; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13584/16]
Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The two matters referred to in this question are separate and distinct.
To help clarify the Deputy's understanding of these events, I refer the Deputy to information I put on the record during a Topical Issues Debate on this issue on September 25, 2012, some of which I repeat below for the benefit of the Deputy.
I am advised that on 2 August 2012, NAMA became aware that a NAMA official had purchased a five bedroom house in Dublin from the agency's portfolio. On 3 August 2012 NAMA instructed its internal auditor, Deloitte, to carry out a comprehensive investigation into the transaction. The newspaper article mentioned in the question concerning the purchase of the property by a NAMA official was published on 5 August 2012.
The Deloitte investigation was an investigation into the purchase of the property. I am advised however, that during the course of the Deloitte investigation, suspicious email traffic was discovered which warranted further investigation.
I am further advised that NAMA issued ex parte proceedings in respect of these suspicions on 3 September 2012. Once the in camera restrictions in respect of the proceedings were lifted on 12 September 2012, the matter was notified to An Garda Siochana and the Data Protection Commissioner.
As the deputy is aware the issue was then investigated by the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation resulting in charges being proffered.
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
271. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, in particular, Parliamentary Question No. 70, which stated that the Garda Síochána bureau of fraud investigation provided instructions to the agency regarding the leaked information, to outline those instructions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13586/16]
Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am advised that NAMA has acted at all times in accordance with the instructions of the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation.
I am further advised by NAMA that The Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation instructed NAMA not to make any public comment about any matter which was the subject of a criminal investigation.
As I advised in my response today (31 May 2016) to Parliamentary Questions 267, 268 and 270, the information collated, and results of searches conducted, during the investigation which led to the prosecution of a former NAMA officer are solely within the remit of the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation and NAMA is not privy to the information.
Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
272. To ask the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 60 to 74 of 18 May 2016 and the consequences of leaks from the National Asset Management Agency, in particular, Parliamentary Question Nos. 64 and 65, which made reference to a Deloitte investigation and report, to provide a copy of the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13587/16]
Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Deputy will appreciate that it would be entirely inappropriate to publish any major review of IT security, data access and data transmission within NAMA. The Deputy will no doubt recognise that publication of such details would be particularly helpful to those who might wish to circumvent the IT security arrangements in place.
No comments