Ireland Treason BANKING crisis

whistleblower has slammed Irelands

politicians for failing the public in the crash.

NAMA Assets Sale

Wednesday, 18 November 2015
NAMA Assets Sale
Wednesday, 18 November 2015
Dil ireann Debate
Vol. 897 No. 1
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates
%20Authoring/WebAttachments.nsf/
($vLookupByConstructedKey)/dail~20151118/$File/Daily
%20Book%20Unrevised.pdf?openelement
First Page Previous Page Page of 98 Next Page Last
Page
Written Answers Nos. 64-69
Credit Union Regulation
64. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae Information on Michael
Healy-Rae Zoom on Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister
for Finance Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on
Michael Noonan his views on a matter (details supplied)
regarding credit unions and the regulatory reserve ratio;
and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40764/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan The issue of
the regulatory reserve ratio for credit unions is a matter
for the Registrar of Credit Unions at the Central Bank who
is the independent regulator for credit unions. Within her
independent regulatory discretion, the Registrar acts to
support the prudential soundness of individual credit
unions, to maintain sector stability and to protect the
savings of credit union members.

NAMA Assets Sale

Wednesday, 18 November 2015
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates
%20Authoring/WebAttachments.nsf/
($vLookupByConstructedKey)/dail~20151118/$File/Daily

%20Book%20Writtens%20Unrevised.pdf?openelement

Mr Wallace said the Isle of Man account was earmarked

for an unnamed Northern Ireland politician and contained
9.8m.
The lawyer, named by Tughans as former managing
partner Ian Coulter, has since left the law firm and the
money was retrieved from the Isle of Man account by
Tughans who have reported the matter to the Northern
Ireland Law Society.
The firm said it is not linked to any political party nor has
it ever made any party political donations.
PAC member and Limerick Fine Gael TD said he was
"anxious" for NAMA to answer questions surrounding the
sale.
"I think that it would help if NAMA came before us as soon
as possible to answer questions so that the air can be
cleared.
Mr Wallace said at the weekend that he knows the name of
the Northern Irish politician but decided against naming
him.
He said: "I could have named the politician against whom
the allegations are being made, but I haven't. He would
have been presumed guilty if I had mentioned him.
"Let's have an investigation of all these matters. Rather
than speculate on whether money changed hands or if
deals were done or if the best prices were achieved, let's
have an inquiry," he said.
While Nama is not directly implicated in the controversy
over the "diverted" fees, and had no contractual
relationship with Tughans, the agency is coming under
pressure to explain what, if anything, it knew about the
scandal.
Nama declined to make any comment on what steps, if
any, it had taken to investigate the circumstances
surrounding the matter and their potential wider
implications for the Project Eagle sale.
Nama has come under increasing scrutiny over its write
downs and business practices from TDs in the Dail while

Fianna Fail has recently tabled a raft of parliamentary

questions about Nama's Northern Ireland operations.
The discounted sale of Nama's Northern Ireland loan book
is the agency's single biggest sale to date.
While Mr Wallace has been urged to go to gardai, he said
that he wants an independent commission of inquiry:
"Things haven't been done in a transparent way and not all
people have always behaved well. I don't believe the best
prices have always been achieved on loan portfolios."
The allegations have caused a storm in Northern Ireland,
where an emergency sitting of the Northern Assembly's
finance committee is to be convened. Political leaders on
all sides have called for a full investigation.
David McNarry MLA has called on the PSNI to launch an
investigation into the allegations of "fixer payments".
"The PSNI now have a clear line of investigation into the
fixers payment put into an Isle of Man bank account.
"I suggest that they pursue vigorously such a line of
inquiry," he said.
The Ukip politician added that the public had a right to
know who the fixers were and who assisted them in fixing
a deal.
"Not only that, but PSNI need to find out who the fixers
used with sufficient political clout and access to do the
fixing," said Mr McNarry.
He added: "The Nama revelations are sensational enough
to bring governments in both Belfast and Dublin tumbling
down."
Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams has demanded answers
from the Irish government on the sale of the Nama
Northern Ireland loan book.
"It should be remembered that this sale was the largest by
Nama in which loans with a par value of 4.5bn was sold
at a huge discount for 1.3bn... It is not good enough that
the government remains silent on this issue which has
handed on a massive loss to citizens."
First Minister Peter Robinson said such stories "damage
politics". "Those with information should give it to the

authorities to test its credibility in a thorough

investigation," he added.
Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness called for an
immediate and full police probe.
Chair of the SDLP Assembly group Alban Maginness said:
"Over the last few days a number of serious allegations
have been raised regarding the sale of the Northern
Ireland property loan portfolio of the National Asset
Management Agency (NAMA) in 2014.
"While the details are still emerging, it is clear that these
allegations are of an exceptionally serious nature and that
there are a number of questions that urgently need
answered.
"Accordingly the SDLP are calling for an emergency sitting
of the Assembly on Thursday the 9th of July. In order to
maintain public confidence in the Assembly the SDLP calls
upon other political parties to support us in our request
for an emergency sitting."
TUV leader Jim Allister said that questions need to be
answered "for the sake of public confidence".
Justice Minister David Ford said anyone with evidence of
criminal wrongdoing should report it to police.
"This allegation is of the utmost seriousness," he added. "If
Mr Wallace has something to report, I would encourage
him to bring it forward to An Garda Siochana and the
PSNI, and allow them to investigate thoroughly."
In a statement on Friday, Nama said that in January 2014
it appointed Lazard, an international investment bank to
advise and oversee Project Eagle, the sale of its 4.5bn
loan book in Northern Ireland. Lazard invited nine major
global investment groups to tender. Cerberus Capital
Management, an American firm, emerged as the highest
and preferred bidder for the portfolio in April 2014. The
sale was completed two months later.
Nama said it got assurances from Cerebus before the sale,
that it wasn't paying a fee to anyone connected with Nama
and the sale process.
Cerebus also issued a statement expressing serious

concern over the sale. A spokesman for Cerberus said: "We

are deeply troubled by Mick Wallace's allegations and we
want to make it clear that no improper or illegal fees were
paid by us or on our behalf and we take any allegations to
the contrary extremely seriously.
"We appointed Brown Rudnick as our lawyers. We were
advised by them that they would be seeking local counsel
support in Northern Ireland by Tughans and that they
would be paying Tughans out of their fees. Cerberus has
never paid Tughans."
Tughans also denied any wrongdoing. According to its
statement, the former partner left the practice while the
law firm Tughans voluntarily reported the matter to the
Law Society of Northern Ireland.
One of two former members of Nama's Northern Ireland
advisory committee said that Mick Wallace's allegations
came as "an absolute shock". He said he was excluded
from the sale of the Northern Ireland loan book.
Background
Nama (National Asset Management Agency), the Republic
of Ireland's state-controlled "bad bank", was set u
I have been informed by the Central Bank that the
rationale for the introduction of a 10% Regulatory Reserve
Ratio in 2009 took account of a number of factors
including the World Council of Credit Unions (WOCCU)
recommendation of 10% of assets, the level of reserves in
the sector at that time and the limited ability for Irish
credit unions to raise capital compared to credit unions in
other jurisdictions and other financial institutions (credit
union reserves are only generated from retained
earnings).
I have further been informed that in relation to a risk
weighted approach to reserves, as previously indicated
consideration will be given to a risk weighted approach by
the Central Bank post sector restructuring.
The Government's priorities remain the protection of
members' savings, the financial stability of credit unions
and the sector overall and it is absolutely determined to

continue to support a strengthened and growing credit

union movement.
Credit Union Regulation
65. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae Information on Michael
Healy-Rae Zoom on Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister
for Finance Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on
Michael Noonan his views on a matter (details supplied)
regarding credit unions and the use of surplus funds; and
if he will make a statement on the matter. [40765/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan The issue of
credit union investments is a matter for the Registrar of
Credit Unions at the Central Bank who is the independent
regulator for credit unions. Within her independent
regulatory discretion, the Registrar acts to support the
prudential soundness of individual credit unions, to
maintain sector stability and to protect the savings of
credit union members.
Section 44 of the Credit Union Act, 1997 provides that a
credit union may establish a special fund to be used by
the credit union for such social, cultural or charitable
purposes (including community development) where it is
approved by a resolution passed by a majority of its
members present and voting at a general meeting. Funds
established under section 44 do not require the approval
of the Central Bank.
The Central Bank has informed me that it is supportive of
such initiatives by credit unions provided they fall within
the provisions of section 44. These provisions include a
requirement that funds paid into such a special fund can
only be paid out of the annual operating surplus of a credit
union and that no funds may be paid into such a special
fund unless adequate provision has been made out of the
annual surplus to cover all current and contingent
liabilities and to maintain proper reserves. The payment of
funds into the special fund should not affect the financial
stability of the credit union. In addition section 44(3) of the
1997 Act specifies that the amount of funds which may be

paid out of the annual operating surplus into such special

fund shall not exceed 0.5% of the value of the credit
union's assets. Where an individual credit union intends to
establish such a fund, the Central Bank informs me that it
would expect the credit union to also take account of the
need to ensure the protection of the funds of its members.
While section 44 is not being replaced or amended, the
remaining sections of the Credit Union and Co-operation
with Overseas Regulators Act 2012, when commenced,
will replace, amend or supplement certain existing
sections of the 1997 Act which will, in effect, remove some
of the requirements (including limits) that currently exist
in certain sections and will provide regulation making
powers to the Central Bank.
The power to make regulations in relation to investments
in projects of a public nature is specifically referenced in
the legislation and therefore such investments could be
facilitated by future regulations, where appropriate, when
specific proposals are formed by the credit union sector.
The Central Bank will be engaging with the credit union
sector in the coming months with a view to gaining a
better understanding of how credit unions want to develop
their business model and to identify whether any changes
are required to the regulatory framework to facilitate
prudent development. The Central Bank is open to
considering well thought through business proposals in
this area including the type of regulations that would be
required to facilitate proposals.
The Government's priorities remain the protection of
members' savings, the financial stability of credit unions
and the sector overall and it is absolutely determined to
continue to support a strengthened and growing credit
union movement.
Tax Rebates
66. Deputy Willie Penrose Information on Willie Penrose
Zoom on Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Finance
Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan
if he will consider in the Finance Bill an amendment to

increase the time limit specified of four years for recovery

of arrears of tax, due to omitting to claim for legitimate
and allowable expenses, such as medical bills, as specified
in section 865(4) of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997; if
this will be increased to six years, which was indicated to
this Deputy in reply to correspondence (details supplied)
on 28 September 2015; and if he will make a statement on
the matter. [40831/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan Section 865
of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, providing for a
statutory general right to repayment of tax as well as
payment of interest, subject to a four year time limit, was
originally introduced in 2003. It provides that no
repayment may be made based on claims submitted more
than four years after the end of the period to which they
relate. Prior to that there was no statutory right to
repayment, though a taxpayer could sue for repayment
under common law.
The Minister at the time indicated that, in introducing the
new arrangements, he was satisfied that they achieved
the necessary balance between establishing a fair and
uniform system for taxpayers while providing necessary
protection for the Exchequer.
At the same time, the general right of the Revenue
Commissioners to raise assessments or make enquiries as
respects taxpayer returns was also reduced to four years,
though in certain circumstances, for example, where fraud
or neglect is suspected or in the context of the application
of general anti-avoidance rules, Revenue's right to enquire
etc. is not time limited. Previously, the general time limit
on the raising of assessments by Revenue had been ten
years.
The convergence of these various time limits on four years
creates parity between a taxpayer's right to repayment
and Revenue's powers to raise assessments.
In response to recent representations on the issue I

indicated that I would, without commitment, instruct my

officials to examine the issue in the context of the Budget
and Finance Bill process. However, in the light of this
examination no change has been recommended.
Universal Social Charge Exemptions
67. Deputy Peadar Tibn Information on Peadar Tibn
Zoom on Peadar Tibn asked the Minister for Finance
Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan
the first-year and full-year cost of exempting income
earners at or below 19,572 from the universal social
charge. [40854/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan I am advised
by the Revenue Commissioners that, on the basis of the
Universal Social Charge (USC) rates and bands proposed in
Budget 2016, the estimated first and full year cost of
increasing the USC exemption threshold from 13,000 to
19,572 is in the order of 63 million and 87 million
respectively.
These figures are estimates from the Revenue tax
forecasting model using latest actual data for the year
2013, adjusted as necessary for income, self-employment
and employment trends in the interim. They are estimated
by reference to 2016 incomes and are provisional and may
be revised.
Tax Yield
68. Deputy Peadar Tibn Information on Peadar Tibn
Zoom on Peadar Tibn asked the Minister for Finance
Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan
the first-year and full-year revenue to be raised from
increasing capital gains tax on passive investment to 35%.
[40857/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan I am
informed by the Revenue Commissioners that, as tax
returns do not provide a basis for compiling estimates in
relation to the amount of CGT liability separately

associated with passive and active activity, it is therefore

not possible to provide the information requested by the
Deputy.
NAMA Assets Sale
69. Deputy Michel Martin Information on Michel Martin
Zoom on Michel Martin asked the Minister for Finance
Information on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan
about reports of his comments in September 2013 to the
First Minister, Mr. Peter Robinson, that the Government
and Stormont would work together with the Pacific
Investment Management Company from the United States
of America, which at the time was the only company
bidding to buy Project Eagle, which subsequently was
bought by Cerberus; and if he will make a statement on
the matter. [40867/15]
Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan): Information
on Michael Noonan Zoom on Michael Noonan On 27
September 2013 I travelled to Belfast to speak at the
Confederation of British Industry's, Northern Ireland
Annual Lunch. While in Belfast I met with First Minister,
Peter Robinson, and the Finance Minister, Simon Hamilton
at Stormont Castle in advance of the lunch to discuss
NAMA's activity in Northern Ireland.
First Minister Robinson had raised concerns in the press
earlier in the week that NAMA's policies in Northern Ireland
may constrain Northern Ireland's recovery and so it was
opportune that we were able to discuss this very
important issue. We discussed NAMA's involvement in
Northern Ireland's economy generally and the recent
interest expressed in NAMA's Northern Ireland portfolio.
NAMA's strategy in Northern Ireland was aimed at
generating sustainable activity and transactions in the
Northern Ireland property market both through orderly
sales and through targeted initiatives such as vendor
finance and joint ventures that were designed to
overcome the lack of funding in the market and enhance
the future value of Northern Ireland assets through a
programme of investment funding.

We also discussed how NAMA's concerns reflected the

concerns of members of the Northern Ireland Executive
about the negative impact "fire sales" would have on the
economy.
We discussed the very strong level of engagement NAMA
had in Northern Ireland with all key stakeholders, which
was supported by NAMA's Northern Ireland Advisory
Committee. NAMA was investing to enhance the value of
its assets in Northern Ireland and had advanced significant
amounts of new money into the Northern Ireland economy
to assist in such projects as the construction of a new 95unit housing development in Milmount, Dundonald, close
to Belfast and to complete Lanyon Plaza and the Soloist
Building which form part of a landmark office development
in the centre of Belfast. This investment came at a time
when there were very few other sources of funding for
projects in Northern Ireland. As was also being reported in
the press at the time, NAMA was working closely with local
housing authorities and approved housing bodies in
Northern Ireland and had recently announced the sale of
over 50 apartments to Oaklee Housing Association in
Belfast.
As the Deputy will be aware, prior to this meeting, on 24
June 2013, I had received an unsolicited expression of
interest for the NAMA Northern Ireland Loan Book, via the
then NI Minister for Finance Sammy Wilson, from Brown
Rudnick on behalf of its client, PIMCO.
The Brown Rudnick letter had suggested a semi-exclusive
sales process and put forward a number of suggestions
regarding the future management of the portfolio for
Minister Wilson to consider. Typically this would not be a
cause for concern. An interested party will often seek a
closed or exclusive sales process because it is in their
interest to remove competition and increase their chances
of success. So, while it may have been somewhat naive to
suggest such an approach, it was not surprising and gave
me no cause for concern as I was aware NAMA would
favour conducting an open market process for any such

sale.
In my reply to Minister Wilson, of 25 July 2013, I advised
that Brown Rudnick should approach NAMA directly with
their expression of interest and clarified that NAMA would
not run an exclusive process but would have to run a
competitive and transparent sales process. At that time, I
also referred the letter I had received to NAMA for their
information.
These documents are in the public domain and are
available on the Department of Finance website.
Following my receipt of this letter and prior to this meeting
in Stormont, NAMA also had received a third party
approach on behalf of PIMCO to sell the loan portfolio on
an exclusive basis.
As a result of these communications, it was known to all at
the meeting that an interest had been expressed on behalf
of PIMCO in acquiring NAMA's Northern Ireland portfolio on
an exclusive basis.
During the meeting I stressed two key considerations that
NAMA would have to take into account in any potential
sale: process and price. That is, NAMA would not enter
into any exclusive sales process, as this would militate
against achieving best value for its assets. Rather, if a
sales process was undertaken, NAMA would openly market
its assets as part of a competitive process. Furthermore,
NAMA would have to be satisfied that it had achieved best
value.
I acknowledged that, to my knowledge, at that point in
time, only one party had expressed interest in acquiring
NAMA's Northern Ireland portfolio which we know was
PIMCO. I acknowledged this during the meeting as a
challenge to moving forward with PIMCO's interest,
pointing out that a sales process could not be undertaken
with a single interested party. As I had stated previously
in my reply to Minister Wilson on 25 July 2013, a single
expression of interest would present a challenge because

NAMA would not launch an exclusive sales process.

However, I indicated that there was likely to be a way
forward if this expression of interest was credible. It was
reasonable to expect that if one party had expressed
credible interest, there may be other parties who may also
be interested. I indicated that as in the past, as the result
of single expressions of interest, it was open to NAMA to
test the market and determine if there was sufficient
interest (i.e. other interested parties) to conduct an open
sales process that would maximise value.
As is now well established, following the expression of
interest from PIMCO, NAMA did test the market interest in
its Northern Ireland loan book and ultimately appointed
Lazard, a major international investment bank, in January
2014 to advise on and oversee the sales process for
Project Eagle. Based on its assessment of the market,
Lazard invited eight other major global investment groups,
alongside PIMCO, to participate in the process. NAMA, in
line with its well established policy on asset and loan
sales, instigated a competitive market sales process in
February 2014.
Sales processes often emerge through reverse enquiries.
This is a normal commercial practice in any market. After
an approach is made at an attractive price, the key for
NAMA is to test that by reference to an open market
process, which was clearly the case in this instance.
With respect to the recently published minute of this
meeting taken by the Private Secretary to the First
Minister, I would point out that - while not inaccurate - this
was not an agreed minute of the meeting and so would
not have had the benefit of comment by myself or my
officials. The minute would naturally have reflected the
elements of the meeting deemed most important by the
minute taker and as it is not a verbatim record of a
meeting will naturally reflect the minute taker's
interpretation of what was said as opposed to what may
have actually been said or intended.

Regarding a reference to "working together" in the minute

- as I have previously outlined (PQ41 of 3 October 2013)
both sides shared an understanding of the importance of
NAMA to the economy in Northern Ireland and the care
needed in dealings in Northern Ireland regarding NAMA's
management of the portfolio. I did not intend to imply
that my administration would work with PIMCO or any
other potential buyers in any way but rather I would have
expressed my confidence that NAMA would be able to
work with potential buyers to overcome any difficulties
and I would have committed to maintaining an open
dialogue between administrations to the extent that was
helpful.
As is on the public record, subsequent to this meeting, I
discussed the progress of the sales process on a limited
number of occasions with my counterparts in the Northern
Ireland Executive. Through all of these discussions, I
made it clear and maintained that the commercial
decisions, as always, remained solely for NAMA.

corrects IE6 width calculation

The Nyberg Report. Minister

Noonan, allow me to confuse
you with the facts.
Tuesday, 19 April 2011

RT - Noonan demands shake-up of

bank boards
Updated: 18:56, Tuesday, 19 April 2011
The Government is to hold a referendum
later this year to enable Oireachtas
committees to compel witnesses to attend
hearings. The development follows the

publication of the Nyberg Report into the

Irish banking crisis.
At a press conference this afternoon,
Finance Minister Michael Noonan said the
previous Government had failed to deal
with the Abbeylara court decision which
had limited the powers of investigation of
committees...
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0419/banks2business.html
REALLY?!? Minister Noonan, the Mr. Nyberg
was was appointed on Sept 22nd. 2010,
seven months after Senator David Norris
raised the issue of the liquidity catastrophe
at UniCredit Ireland which was ignored by
the Financial Regulator.
Sepetmber 2010 was FOUR months after I
met with a senior Fine Gael deputy at a law
firm in Ballsbridge. This is the meeting you
allegedly know nothing about, why else
would you have issued such a sweeping
denial of the fact that Fine Gael had had
any dealings with me?
Sepetmber 2010 was also two years after
the entire Irish banking sector ran dry of

liquidity which was why the 'blanket

gurantee' was put in place. Now you want
to "compel witnesses to attend hearings"?
I volutarily provided Fine Gael with an
account of the liquidity breaches at
UniCredit Ireland, and this was evidenced
by a very senior banker. What more could
you have wanted?
Please Minister Noonan, spare us the
drama. We will be paying for the Fianna
Fail saga for generations to come. We
expected more of our new government.

PS
If it is the 'honest truth' that you are after,
how do you explain the fact that Kathleen
Barrington of the Sunday Business Post can
not get a straight answer from anyone in
official Dublin in regard of Anglo's austrian
deposists? Let us not forget that Anglo is
now headed by a FG man.
http://kathleenbarrington.blogspot.com/20

11/02/how-fitzpatrick-sent-600m-depositbook.html
http://kathleenbarrington.blogspot.com/20
11/01/600m-anglo-deposits-that-gotaway.html
All we want to know is:
Are we bailing out via NAMA and/or other
schemes people who are allegedly
bankcrupt, but actually have millions
stashed away in a bank which is now
Swiss-owned? We do not want names, just
a simple Yes/No answer will suffice. Surely
now that we, the people of Ireland, own
Anglo-Irish Bank, we are entiteled to know
what it got up to in the 'good old days'.

BANK TO THE FUTURE

Banking crisis
whistleblower Jonathan

Sugarman claims Irish

financial situation has
gotten much worse since
collapse
Former Unicredit Risk Manager Jonathan
Sugarman slams Irish politicians for
"failing the public"
BY ADAM HIGGINS 6th December 2016,

A BANKING crisis whistleblower has slammed

Irelands politicians for failing the public in the crash.
And he claims the financial situation here has gotten
much worse since the collapse in 2008.

Former bank executive Jonathan Sugarman warns that Irish

banking situation has gotten worse

Jonathan Sugarman, a former executive with Unicredit

Bank Ireland, resigned from his role in 2007 after
informing former Financial Regulator Patrick Neary that he
(Sugarman) was breaking the law by signing off on billions
of euro that didnt exist.
The ex-risk manager recently addressed the EU
Parliament where he said his concerns were ignored by
the Financial Regulator in 2007 and that there is nothing
being done to sanction the people responsible for the
collapse of Irish banks that led to the recession here.
Sugarman claims he has met with a number of politicians
who are aware of his story including Fine Gaels Richard
Bruton and Labours Joan Burton.
Speaking to the Irish Sun at the launch of his book The
Whistleblower, Sugarman said former Finance Minister
Ruairi Quinn wanted him to speak in front of the Public
Accounts Committee but later changed his mind.
He said: Labour Partys Ruairi Quinn wanted me to come
in front of the Public Accounts Committee. Then Quinn
changed his mind and I dont know why. Of course the
politicians failed the country. I say this very clearly in my
book.
When Joan Burton looks at me in my eye and says to me
obviously youre a foreigner, you didnt know that in
Ireland there is no such thing as white collar crime. Had I
known you at the time I would have told you to get another
job. That is exactly what she said to me.

Former Unicredit Rish Manager reveals all in his new book

The Whistleblower

Sugarman says he received all kinds of threats when he

began telling his story to media across the globe and has
lost everything as a result of blowing the whistle.
He said: I have lost everything. Ive been hospitalised.
Apart from selling my body Ive sold everything else.
And the only way Ill sell my body now is by the kilo.
Who would employ a banker who obeys the law in
Ireland? Name me one bank. I would do it all again
because I can walk through Dublin and hold my head up
high.
The former bank exec also claims Ireland has not learned
from its mistakes and our banking sector is now much
worse than it was before.

He said: In Irish law it says that if there is a failure, not

only are the executives to be held responsible but also the
regulator.
How many people in the regulators office have been held
accountable for the absolute collapse of Irish banks? How
many? None! This is fact. This is five years in prison.
If I was taken seriously nine years ago of course Ireland
would be in a better position today. We wouldnt have had
to cough up all of these billions to bail out other peoples
banks. We are far from getting it right now. Far from it.
Given the emails Ive seen in the last few days it has all
gotten much worse.

Irish MEP Ming Flanagan has backed Sugarmans claims

Irish MEP Luke Ming Flanagan, who took Jonathan

Sugarman to the European Parliament early this year, told
the Irish Sun nothing has changed since the banking
collapse and Ireland is in major trouble in the future.

He said: What has changed since the crisis is that we are

now at an additional 70bn plus in debt, thanks to the
decision to bail out the banks.
As for being on the right track we are on the same
track, just a hell of a lot further down the line. All our banks
are still in major trouble. In Europe, well, just wait til the
chickens come home to roost in Deutsche Bank and
Unicredit, to name but two of the big fish.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/251447/bankin
g-crisis-whistleblower-jonathan-sugarmanclaims-irish-financial-situation-has-gottenmuch-worse-since-collapse/

Whistleblowers Jonathan Sugarman at

EU Parliament 15 11 2016
Nov 17, 2016
here's a link with better sound:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuAQO...
Video: Vasileios Katsardis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuAQOjkjwM&t=0s

Johnathon Sugarman (Whistleblower)

With Vincent Browne
Dec 6, 2016
This is a must watch & share.
The interview you all have being waiting for. Finally Irish
mainstream interviews Johnathon Sugarman, author of the
book Whistleblower. Johnathon goes into great detail
surrounding the complete lack of lawful behaviour of our
banks, the regulator and of the Irish government.
My apoligies for the quality, sadly I need to upgrade all my
computing tech.

Find Truthful Irish @ https://www.facebook.com/truthful.irish/

Contents used under the Fair Use acts.
Show is edited, all ads and newspaper reviews have been
removed. Watch the full uninterrupted video here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUpmZV8QZiw

The Irish Banking Crisis and European Monetary UnionOpening Statement Philip R. Lane Trinity College Dublin 7
January 2015

https://inquiries.oireachtas.ie/banking/wpcontent/uploads/2015/01/Prof-Philip-LaneOpening-Statment-january2015.pdf
Opening Statement to the Joint Committee
on the Banking Crisis ... Bank of Ireland
was the most conservative of all the Irish
http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/
Banking/ThomasOConnellTOC00001.pdf
Programme for Government: Annual Report
2012 - Taoiseach 2012
Programme for Government: Annual Report 2012 ... Irish
banking system, ... managing the banking crisis.

http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Publicatio
ns/Publications_Archive/Publications_2011/
PfG_Progress_Report_March_2012.pdf
DIL IREANN CEISTEANNA ... Act 2015 to the owners of credit
and to ensure that non-bank lenders and ... and if he will make
a statement on the matter. Joan Burton.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/op/Ma
y16/Questions/pq180516.pdf

BURTON ANNOUNCES CANDIDACY FOR LABOUR

LEADERSHIP ... Governor of the Bank of England remarked
that prosperity requires investment in social

http://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/joan
-burton-statement.pdf

Court issues written

judgment on O'Brien
injunction
Updated / June 5, 2015

The High Court has issued its written

judgment giving its reasons for granting an
injunction to Denis O'Brien and Irish Bank
Resolution Corporation against RT.
The injunctions prevent RT from
broadcasting confidential details of Mr
O'Brien's personal banking arrangements
with the IBRC.
Mr Justice Donald Binchy said he had made
some redactions to the judgment but he said
they were "fairly minimal".
He said he had taken on board comments
made by lawyers for RT in legal submissions
yesterday.
He said he had taken into account not just
the exact text of Independent TD Catherine
Murphy's speech to the Dil last Thursday but
also the meaning of what she said.
Mr Justice Binchy also said the redactions

related to issues that could not be reasonably

inferred from what Ms Murphy said in the
Dil.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Binchy said the
existence of a right to confidentiality
between a bank and its customers had been
recognised in law for almost a century.
He said there was a public interest in the
maintenance of such confidentiality for the
benefit of society at large.
He said the right to confidentiality was not
absolute and it may give way to issues of
very significant public importance.
He said it seemed to him that there must be
some meaningful connection between the
issue of public importance identified and the
person whose rights may be breached and
the information and documentation under
consideration.
The judge said there was no doubt at all
about the public interest in the affairs of
IBRC. But he said that did not entitle the
public to know every detail of the affairs or
operation of IBRC and certainly not
confidential information concerning its
customers.
He said where there were any significant
shortcomings in the governance and
operation of IBRC, in particular where those
shortcomings may lead to significant losses,
which had to be borne by the public purse,
then the public was entitled to be informed of

such matters.
He said the concern RT had raised is that
when a deadline for the repayment of Mr
O'Brien's loans expired, Mr O'Brien applied to
the CEO for an extension of time to repay the
balance.
He said RT contended that this request may
not have been properly processed within
IBRC.
RT contended that Mr O'Brien alleged he
had a verbal agreement with the CEO, Mike
Aynsley, in circumstances where such an
agreement would need credit committee
approval.
The judge said if such an agreement was
reached without credit committee approval it
would indicate a failure of corporate
governance, having regard to the significant
balance of the loan outstanding.
He said if it led to a loss for IBRC, that might
well justify a finding that Mr O'Brien could not
rely on the confidentiality that would
otherwise apply.
But the judge found no evidence of a
substantive nature was presented to the
court to allow him to conclude there had
been such a failure of corporate governance.
He said at its height, RT's case was that Mr
O'Brien himself alleged he had a verbal
agreement with Mr Aynsley. And that the
special liquidator Kieran Wallace said it would
not be unusual for borrowers to say they had
such an agreement.

But the judge said this fell short of

establishing the conclusion of such an
agreement.
He said the existence of this agreement was
not accepted by IBRC.
O'Brien had 'right to privacy' in banking
documentation
The judge said that Mr O'Brien had a right to
privacy in his banking documentation under
the European Convention of Human Rights
and the Constitution.
He said IBRC and Mr O'Brien had a right to
confidentiality in their dealings with each
other and said this had to be balanced
against the right of RT to freedom of
expression also under the convention and the
Constitution.
He said the court must take into account the
fact that very little, if any, connection had at
this stage been established between the
public interest in alleged failures of corporate
governance at IBRC and Mr O'Brien's
personal dealings with IBRC.
In the absence of such a connection, he said
he believed Mr O'Brien and IBRC had
established a convincing case they would
succeed at a full trial of the matter.
The judge found that damages would not be
an adequate remedy for Mr O'Brien, taking
into account evidence from a banking expert,
Marcus Trench, about the losses Mr O'Brien
might sustain into the future.
He then considered the balance of

convenience.
He ruled that if he did not grant the
injunctions, significant details of Mr O'Brien's
banking affairs would be placed in the public
domain immediately.
He said if Mr Trench was correct, that would
cause Mr O'Brien incalculable loss.
But he said on the other hand, the IBRC story
was an ongoing one and was highly likely to
remain newsworthy for a considerable time
to come, and certainly well after the end of
these proceedings.
Mr Justice Binchy ruled the balance of
convenience in granting the injunctions
favoured IBRC and Mr O'Brien.
The matter will be back before the court on
Friday, when RT may make further
applications to the court.

Analysis by Brian Dowling of RTs

Political Staf

There are a number of strands politically to

what may unfold next week. Catherine
Murphy may want to pursue her Private
Members Bill, which is intended to increase
the powers of the Comptroller and Auditor
General to allow a wider investigation into
IBRC.
There could be fairly significant support, or
unanimous support, on the opposition
benches for that but the Government may
want to hold the line and stick by the
review it has initiated by KPMG - the special
liquidators of IBRC.
Denis OBriens complaint about Ms
Murphy's speech may go from the Ceann
Comhairle to the Committee on Procedures
and Privileges. However, even if Dil
members grossly transgress privilege and
abuse it in an appalling fashion there does
not seem to be any sanction of a magnitude
that would be equivalent of the wrong done.
This is something that has come into more
play politically following Mary Lou McDonalds
"Ansbacher" comments in the Dail.
The ruling by Mr Justice Binchy may also
have an impact on any debate. Mr Justice
Binchy is very clear that he decided to grant
the injunction to Mr O'Brien because there
was no substantive evidence put to him
concerning Mr O'Brien's dealings with IBRC
that would give rise to a public interest
sufficient to warrant setting aside his right to
privacy regarding his banking details.

Listen to Brian Dowling's Analysis on News At

One
Judge outlines background
Mr Justice Binchy set out the background to
the case in his judgment.
He said that on 28 April 2015, RT wrote to
Mr O'Brien and IBRC, requesting certain
information concerning a debt due by Mr
O'Brien to IBRC.
The researcher, Pamela Fraher, said she had
seen a letter of October 2013 from Mr O'Brien
to IBRC, in which he claimed to have had an
agreement with the previous management of
IBRC to repay the outstanding balance of
loans over a three-year period as opposed to
a one-year period previously agreed.
Ms Fraher informed Mr O'Brien and IBRC that
she was working on a news report in relation
to that request and that it was intended to
state in RT's report that Mr O'Brien had
sought an extension of the repayment period
of his loan, that this was agreed with IBRC
management at the time, in particular, Mr
Aynsley, and that Mr O'Brien or his
companies benefitted financially from these
arrangements.
The letter addressed a series of questions to
Mr O'Brien and IBRC.
Mr O'Brien's and IBRC's solicitors replied that
whatever documentation it had in relation to
their clients, it had been received unlawfully
and without their consent and requested all

such documentation to be delivered to

them.
Solicitors for Mr O'Brien said the disclosure of
information and documentation to RT was a
breach of Mr O'Brien's rights to privacy and
confidentiality and any further breach could
not be justified by any public interest in
disclosure.
Injunction proceedings began on 30 April.
Mr O'Brien, in sworn documents, claimed RT
had come into confidential information
relating to his personal banking
arrangements with IBRC without his authority
or the authority of anyone acting on his
behalf, in breach of his rights to privacy and
confidence.
He said he would suffer irreparable harm
personally and financially if the information
was broadcast.
He said RT had advanced no public interest
to displace the confidentiality between him
and his bankers.
In reply, RT Business Editor David Murphy
said the focus of the report was not so much
on the finances of Mr O'Brien as on the
governance of IBRC and how it was that a
major debtor such as Mr O'Brien was in a
position after the liquidation of IBRC
commenced to seek an extension of time on
his loans, on foot of an alleged verbal
agreement with the former CEO allegedly
made prior to the commencement of the
liquidation.

He also said that RT asserted the dealings

between Mr O'Brien and the former
management of IBRC and between Mr O'Brien
and the liquidators were matters of
legitimate and public interest outweighing Mr
O'Brien's right to confidentiality.
The judge set out evidence of a meeting
between the Minister for Finance and IBRC in
July 2012.
In this meeting Mr Aynsley said they had a
strong but "not inappropriate" relationship
with Denis O'Brien.
The judge said Mr Murphy said that at some
point prior to appointment of the liquidators
Mr O'Brien had discussions with Mr Aynsley,
the then chief executive of IBRC, and senior
executive Richard Woodhouse, with a view to
extending the repayment period of his
loans.
Mr Murphy said that Mr O'Brien subsequently
asserted to the special liquidator, Kieran
Wallace, that he had an agreement with Mr
Aynsley and Mr Woodhouse to extend the
repayment period by three years.
Mr Murphy said such an agreement would
have conveyed a significant benefit on Mr
O'Brien.
Mr Murphy said that he understood former
management of IBRC denied their discussions
resulted in such an agreement.
He also says they did not have any approval
for such an agreement by any credit
committee or board of IBRC.

The judge said Mr Murphy said these claims

should be in the public domain because it
amounted to an assertion by Mr O'Brien that
senior IBRC management dealt with a
borrower who owed hundreds of millions of
euro to the State - on basis of unrecorded
verbal agreements to the extension of loan
repayment periods.
He also said it amounted to an assertion by
Mr O'Brien that senior IBRC management, by
the verbal agreement, conferred a significant
benefit on him.
He said Mr Murphy said it amounted to an
assertion by Mr O'Brien that while the
agreement was proper from Mr O'Brien's
point of view, senior IBRC management had
made an agreement with him in respect of
over 300m of debt which was from IBRC's
point of view, very likely highly irregular.
Mr Murphy said such assertions were made
against a backdrop of recorded concern by
the Department of Finance in relation to
management by senior IBRC management of
relationships with major IBRC borrowers.
The judge said there was no allegation
whatsoever of any misconduct or wrongdoing
on the part of Mr O'Brien.
The judgment sets out a second affidavit
from Mr O'Brien in which he says he wants to
address a number of factual inaccuracies.
Mr O'Brien says his loan was performing and
there was no evidence or any expectation
that it would not be repaid in full.

He said he had paid interest and principal

and was fully compliant with the covenants
relating to his loan when many debtors were
not.
He denied he ever threatened any legal
action against IBRC or that he ever suggested
the credit committee should be bypassed.
He alleged RT was trying to use information
confidential to Mr O'Brien to try to promote
its story.
The judge also set out the evidence of
banking expert Marcus Trench who swore an
affidavit on behalf of Mr O'Brien.
In his reply, Mr Murphy said that if an
agreement was made to extend Mr O'Brien's
loans without credit committee approval then
that was not a criticism of Mr O'Brien but
identified a significant issue of corporate
governance within IBRC.
The judge said Mr Murphy also said he
understood former IBRC management
asserted that their discussions with Mr
O'Brien were conducted on the basis that
nothing was agreed until agreed by the credit
committee and that no proposal to extend
the period of Mr O'Brien's loans was agreed
or sent to credit committee on foot of those
discussions.
Mr Murphy also said an internal note in 2013
to the credit committee analysed the issue of
the extension of Mr O'Brien's loan in terms of
the risk of litigating to enforce the alleged
agreement.

Mr Murphy said he was not asserting that Mr

O'Brien had received any loan write-off. But
he said Mr O'Brien did agitate for and may
have received the significant benefit of an
extension of time within which to pay his
loans.
The judge set out that Mr O'Brien wrote to Mr
Wallace, the joint liquidator of IBRC, on 12
October 12, requesting a one-year extension
of his loan facilities.
The judge said the remaining balance was
substantial.
He said Mr O'Brien maintained in the letter
that he had an agreement with the previous
management that the balance could be
repaid over the following years.
O'Brien 'delighted' with Judge
Binchy's judgement
In a statement released this afternoon, Mr
O'Brien said that he is 'delighted' with the
judgement released today.
He said that he noted Mr Justice Binchy's
statement about the existence of a right of
confidentiality between a bank and its
customers.
He also said: "I note that during the hearing
RT emphasised there as no allegation of
wrongdoing against me of any kind."
Burton 'pleased' about judgment
Tanaiste Joan Burton said she was really
pleased about yesterday's court judgment
protecting Dil privilege, and the clarification
that it extends to media reporting.

However, she said it was "unfortunate" the

clarification was delayed because of the Bank
Holiday weekend.
Rabbitte welcomes clarity of court
decision
Earlier, Labour TD Pat Rabbitte welcomed the
clarity yesterday's court decision brought.
Speaking on RTs Morning Ireland, he said it
is clear now it was never the intention of the
court to restrict what goes on in the Dil or to
restrict media coverage on what happened in
the Dil.
He also said there was never a situation
where there was a constitutional crisis.
"The issue of the much hyped constitutional
crisis where the implication has been for
almost a week, where parliaments and the
courts were in conflict, is not the case. There
never was a situation where there was a
constitutional crisis."
But he said there are still important issues
that need to be cleared up.
"What we don't have clarity on is the fact
that the statement that RT was injuncted on
seems to be different in some material
respects to the statement in the Dil by
[Independent TD] Catherine Murphy.
"Denis O'Brien has never said that the RT
statement or the one they did want to
publish is inaccurate. He has said the
statement by Catherine Murphy is inaccurate
in some respects."

Mr Rabbitte said he does not think that Ms

Murphy has a responsibility to reveal her
sources and said he thinks she would have
acted in good faith.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0603/705504denis-obrien-media/

Legal groups join call for no vote in

referendum

21/10/2011

There are growing calls for a no vote in the

referendum on giving the Oireachtas powers to
conduct inquiries.
The Bar Council, the Law Society and the Irish Council
for Civil Liberties (ICCL) are among those urging
people to reject the proposed 30th amendment to the
Constitution, one of two proposed amendments being
voted on next Thursday October 27 in parallel with the
presidential election.
The ICCL said the proposed change to the
Constitution, giving more powers of investigation to
the Oireachtas, has been rushed through without
sufficient debate and is effectively a power grab by
the executive over the courts.
The Referendum Commission leaflet dropped through
letterboxes only a week before polling day and there
has been no adequate public debate or consultation
on these measures," said ICCL director Mark Kelly.
"This amendment would shift power from the courts to
the Oireachtas, enabling parliamentary committees to
tarnish the good name of people appearing before

them, with no certainty that fair procedures would be

observed.
"Oireachtas Committees do need to be overhauled and
improved, but only after mature consideration, and in
a way that strikes a far better balance between the
public interest and the rights of the individual.
"Anyone who is concerned about the rule of law should
vote no to this proposal next Thursday.
Up to 12 Independent TDs and Senators are also
urging people to vote no, saying the constitutional
amendment risks giving politicians "too much power"
and is being "rushed through".
The group is comprised of TDs Catherine Murphy,
Shane Ross, Stephen Donnelly, Finian McGrath,
Maureen OSullivan, John Halligan, Mick Wallace, Luke
"Ming" Flanagan, Thomas Pringle, Tom Fleming, and
senators John Crown and Ronn Mullen.
Former minister Mary O'Rourke has also come out
strongly against the proposed amendment, which she
dismissed as "pointless" and "useless".
However Taoiseach Enda Kenny said he believes it is
appropriate that elected members of the Oireachtas
carry out investigations in a quicker time and at a far
less cost than what he called "endless and very costly"
tribunals of inquiry.
"It should be possible - as it applies in every other
parliament - to have inquires that are of public
importance," Mr Kenny said.
"Where those elected by the people can call them in to
ask questions that are in the public interest."

Committees of the Houses of

the Oireachtas
(Compellability, Privileges

and Immunities of Witnesses)

Act, 1997

http://www.irishstatuteb
ook.ie/eli/1997/act/17/en
acted/en/pdf
Rushed referendums
Wed, Oct 12, 2011

WHEN THE people go to the polls on October 27th to elect

a president, they will also be asked to vote in two
referendums to change the Constitution. But so far the
debate between candidates on who should be president
has greatly overshadowed discussion on the more abstract
issues raised by these referendums on the pay of judges,
and the powers of the Oireachtas to hold inquiries. Both
Bills to amend the Constitution were passed rapidly by the
Oireachtas, where they faced little opposition and received
inadequate scrutiny. The publication yesterday of the
Referendum Commissions guide, which sets out clearly
what the electorate is being asked to vote on, has now left
voters with a little over two weeks to inform themselves on
both questions.
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/rushed-referendums-1.615312?
mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fopinion%2Frushed-referendums-1.615312

Blame game
Monday, October 31, 2011
By Mary Regan, Political Correspondent

ATTEMPTS by Brendan Howlin to shift the blame for the

defeat of the Oireachtas inquiries referendum have
backfired after he became embroiled in a row with the
independent Referendum Commission.

The Public Expenditure and Reform Minister was forced to

backtrack on criticism of the commissions chairman,
retired High Court judge Bryan McMahon, after Mr Howlin
was acc-used of personalising the issue.
Mr Howlin has now said he only commented on Dr
McMahons performance as shorthand for the views of
the commission as a whole.
A statement on behalf of Mr Howlin said he did not
consider his comment, that the commissions
interpretation of the proposed amendment caused
confusion, was criticism.
[Mr Howlin] simply indicated that the views of the
commission differed from the advice received from the
states law officers, as articulated by the Government, and
that the electorate found this aspect of the campaign
confusing, he said.
However, the commission said it regretted the comments
and was satisfied that it carried out its duty with the
independence and neutrality required by law.
In an unorthodox statement, its high-ranking members
piled extra embarrassment on Mr Howlin after the
referendum was defeated, with 53.3% voting against it.
In a bid to end the row, the Government released a
statement in which it reaffirmed the absolute
independence of the Referendum Commission.
The controversy erupted as Tnaiste Eamon Gilmore
refused to rule out a second referendum on the issue,
saying it would be revisited.
The Labour leader said there would not be an inquiry into
the banking crisis because another referendum would not
take place in the near future. But he did not rule out
holding another vote on Oireachtas inquiries.
He told RTs The Week in Politics the Government would
think through now what were the reasons why the

referendum was defeated, and at some point a decision

will have to be made as to whether we revisit this issue.
Mr Howlins criticism related to remarks by Dr McMahon
last week. Referring to whether recourse to the courts
would be possible if such inquiries went ahead, he said:
Its not possible to state definitively what role, if any, the
courts would have in reviewing procedures if adopted.
In a statement last night, the commission stood over what
was said about the role of courts.
It said this was not the view of Dr McMahon but the
Referendum Commission as a whole in fulfilment of its
statutory role of giving a general explanation of
referendum proposals.
The statement said the chairman gave a number of
media interviews which were based entirely on the
commissions agreed view with the help of independent
legal advice.
Fianna Fil spokesman Sean Fleming called on Mr Howlin
to withdraw his remarks.
Mr Howlin also came under a veiled attack from Labour
colleague Joan Burton, who told the Sunday Independent
the issues were not properly discussed in a bad-tempered
argument on Prime Time between Mr Howlin and former
attorney general Michael McDowell.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/blame-game172376.html

Government publishes
wording of Abbeylara
referendum
The government has only published a draft version today but the Bill
needs passing in ten days if the ballot is to be held in time.
Sep 12th 2011, 4:14 PM 1,125 Views 6 Comments
Share2 Tweet4 Email1

Photo

The proposed referendum is intended to overturn the Supreme Court's

ruling in the Abbeylara case.
Image: Joe Dunne/Photocall Ireland

/Photo Text content

THE GOVERNMENT HAS today published the wording of
its proposed referendum reversing the Abbeylara ruling
and giving Oireachtas committees the power to hold
inquiries.
The wording of the bill officially the Thirtieth
Amendment to the Constitution Bill, 2011 was published
this afternoon by the Minister for Public Expenditure and
Reform, Brendan Howlin, who is responsible for
governmental reform.
Howlin said the bill which amends Article 15.10 of the
Constitution will allow the Oireachtas to have an
effective system of inquiry, which can secure effective and
cost-efficient parliamentary scrutiny of issues of
significant public importance.
The bill is specifically intended to address the Supreme
Courts ruling in 2002 on the Abbeylara case, when it
affirmed an earlier High Court ruling that Oireachtas
inquiries did not have the power to make findings of fact
or expressions of opinion adverse to the good name or

reputation of citizens.
The Bill is set to be tabled in the Dil on Thursday, and is
due to have passed both the Dil and Seanad by Thursday
week, so that it can be put to a referendum alongside the
Presidential election next month.
Irish referendum law requires that at least 30 days notice
be given of a referendum meaning the government has
until September 27 to have the bill passed through both
houses and put forward to a public ballot.
The government also today published a draft version of a
new Houses of the Oireachtas (Powers of Inquiry) Bill,
which generally outlines the terms under which Oireachtas
committees will hold their inquiries if the referendum is
passed.
The government has sought feedback from any interested
parties on the content of the bill, and said it hopes to
publish a full version of the legislation later this autumn.

Wording of proposed amendment to the

Constitution

The existing Article 15.10 would be renumbered 15.10.1.

Three new subsections would be inserted as follows:
2 Each House shall have the power to conduct an inquiry,
or an inquiry with the other House, in a manner provided
for by law, into any matter stated by the House or Houses
concerned to be of general public importance.
3 In the course of any such inquiry the conduct of any
person (whether or not a member of either House) may be
investigated and the House or Houses concerned may
make findings in respect of the conduct of that person
concerning the matter to which the inquiry relates.
4 It shall be for the House or Houses concerned to
determine the appropriate balance between the rights of
persons and the public interest for the purposes of
ensuring an effective inquiry into any matter to which
subsection 2 applies.
Proposed Referendum to amend the Constitution to enable

the Houses of the Oireachtas to undertake full inquiries &

Overview of the Proposed System of Oireachtas Inquiry

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/
media/2011/09/2011091
2referendumnote.pdf
GENERAL SCHEME OF THE

HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS (POWERS OF INQUIRY)

BILL 2011

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/
media/2011/09/2011091
2headsofbill.pdf
Law Society of Ireland expresses grave concerns about
Constitutional Referenda on Parliamentary Inquiries and
Judicial Pay

https://www.lawsociety.i
e/Global/eNewsletters/eb
ulletin/LSRB_2011/News
Releasereferenda_171011.pdf
Law Society of Ireland expresses grave concerns about
Constitutional Referenda on Parliamentary Inquiries and
Judicial Pay
Following a meeting held last Friday, 14th October 2011,
the Council of the Law Society has expressed grave

concerns regarding the two proposed amendments to the

Constitution being put to the people on Thursday, 27th
October 2011.
Amendment on Parliamentary inquiries
In relation to the amendment on Parliamentary inquiries,
the Council noted that the proposed amendment would
permit Parliament to conduct inquiries into matters of
general public importance and, in doing so, to make
findings of fact about any persons conduct.
The proposed amendment arose following a decision of
the Supreme Court in the Abbeylara case that Parliament
did not have an inherent power to conduct inquiries that
involved requiring witnesses to attend to give evidence
and to produce documents, and which could make findings
that adversely affected the good name of any person.
The Council accepts that Parliamentary inquiries have
been conducted into matters of serious public importance
by legislative bodies in other countries over many years.
Many of these inquiries have proved to be both effective
and efficient in terms of the results they have achieved
within the time required. However, while it is not unusual
or unprecedented for a national parliament or legislature
to have a power to conduct inquiries, extreme care must
be taken in doing so. The Society is concerned that the
wording of the proposed amendment goes beyond merely
reversing the effect of the Abbeylara decision of the
Supreme Court in 2002.
The Council notes that parliamentary inquiries are an
extremely powerful mechanism, sometimes dangerously
so, since they can be driven by overwhelming public and
political demands for culprits and even scapegoats. This
can create a climate of
1
[Page 1 of 3]...
hysteria that would be highly prejudicial for any individual
witness summoned to give evidence. An example would
be the hearings before the US Congress into un- American
activities and the devastating effect those inquisitions
had on so many individuals.
It is because of this potentially irresistible force that can
be exerted on an individual by a Parliamentary inquiry that

the Society has cause for great concern.

The Society believes that the wording of the amendment
omits any guarantee for the protection of individual rights
and leaves persons appearing before an inquiry at the
mercy of party political interests. The Society believes also
that the bill is not consistent with basic standards of
fairness in that it vests the sole discretion to interpret the
balance between individual rights and the public interest
in the Oireachtas, the very organ of the State that would
be carrying out the investigation. It does not contain and,
indeed, would seem to exclude the possibility of
independent judicial review.
The Society believes that the amendment, if passed,
would signify a serious shift in the Constitutional balance
of authority between the courts and the Parliament in
matters regarding the rights of individuals whose good
names may be negatively affected by inquiries.
The Societys concerns have been heightened, rather than
allayed, by the contents of the recently-published draft
Houses of the Oireachtas (Powers of Inquiry) Bill 2011,
which will give effect to the passing of the referendum.
Under this bill, there is a stark contrast between the scope
of the powers conferred on politicians of search and
seizure and of requiring the giving of evidence under
compulsion, on the one hand, and the rights of ordinary
citizens who will have no guaranteed opportunity to
defend themselves by being provided with the whole
evidence against them and no opportunity to confront
their accusers with the benefit of legal representation, on
the other. Proper representation before a Parliamentary
inquiry, and at any court application arising from it, will be
denied those who do not have the means to pay for their
legal representation and the legislation fails to impose an
obligation on the inquiry to meet that legal cost.
The treatment of citizens embroiled in the inquiries is also
in sharp contrast to the privileges and immunities
conferred on the politicians. A witness before an inquiry
gives evidence on pain of prosecution for inaccuracy and
subject to civil suit arising from their participation. The
politicians, on the other hand, are absolutely immunised
from action in respect of anything that they say or do,
however reckless or unfounded.

In summary, the Society believes that the 30th

Amendment to the Constitution will have a potentially farreaching and detrimental effect on the Constitutional right
to procedural fairness. The protection of natural justice is
a serious matter and the Society believes that the
proposed amendment falls short of what is required. The
courts of Ireland have taken great care to build a
sophisticated and reputable base of precedent that
provides every citizen with an inviolable guarantee of
basic fairness of procedure when faced by a challenge
from the State to their constitutional rights.
2
[Page 2 of 3]...
The original framers of the Constitution were careful to
follow the separation-of- powers model that has stood the
test of time in many jurisdictions around the world. The
separation of powers is designed to curb abuse of
authority.
Because it is central to our Constitutional framework, any
adjustment to this principle should only follow careful and
detailed analysis and debate.
Amendment on Judicial pay
In relation to the amendment on judicial pay, the Council
confirmed that, in principle, the Law Society does not
object to the objective of the amendment, that is, that the
judiciary should be subject to the same levels of pay
reduction as other members of the public service in times
of economic crisis. However, the Council believes that the
particular wording that is to be put to the people is
deficient in its reference to an undefined class of
persons and may be open to abuse by another
Government at some stage in the future.
The Council noted that the importance of the
independence of the judiciary cannot be underestimated.
A society without an independent judiciary is not a
democracy.
It is well recognised across the democratic world that
interference with judicial pay is a classic means of
interfering with judicial independence and, accordingly,
great care needs to be taken about any mechanism
designed to achieve the Governments objective.
In the opinion of the Law Society, it would be preferable if

the decision-making power was vested in an independent

body, whose impartiality would not be open to question
either by the Government or the judiciary.
ENDS
Issued by:
Law Society of Ireland, Blackhall Place, Dublin 7

Inquiries referendum is lazy measure that

wont empower the Oireachtas
Eoin O'Malley / October 24, 2011

Eoin OMalley 24 October

The referendum on the 30th amendment the inquiries
referendum is on the face of it something most people would
want to support. It seeks to empower the Oireachtas to hold
inquiries which should strengthen the government oversight
function. Specifically it seeks to overturn (or render void) the
decision in Maguire v. Ireland (the Abbeylara Judgement) which
among other things:
as there was no provision in the Constitution which expressly
authorised the Oireachtas to conduct inquiries of the nature
which had been undertaken by the Abbeylara sub-committee,
any such power must be inherent or implied.
2. That the constitutional right to protection of ones good
name had to be given due weight in considering the question
of balance of rights.
Per Murray, McGuinness and Geoghegan JJ.: That the Dil and
Seanad had a limited power to inquire, which was inherent in
the Constitution, which was implied solely and directly in aid of
the functions of each House as delineated in the Constitution.
The power did not extend to making findings of fact
concerning the individual culpability of non-members of the
Oireachtas which involved damage to the good name of such
individuals.
3. That a power, wholly or partly, to initiate a tribunal of
inquiry, whose salient characteristic was that it was
independent of the political process, could not support the
existence of a power, inherent or implied, to establish a form
of inquiry which was wholly political.
In particular the court, quite reasonably, found that the power
of the sub-Committee to potentially making a finding of
unlawful killing as problematic. The court noted that this
would be the role of the Courts to adjudicate on such issues.
But the court in rewording the declaration from that of the High
Court used the adjective such to describe the inquiries is
thought problematic. The Court did NOT rule out all inquiries; it

was the Oireachtas timidity which ended the practice. The

court left open the possibility that the Oireachtas might come
back with a more suitable topic for inquiry carried out in a
more suitable manner. The Oireachtas may be forgiven for not
wanting to go back to the courts, when the courts were not as
clear as they could have been in instructing the Oireachtas as
to exactly what the parameters of inquiries it saw as suitable.
The Supreme Court did seem to close the door somewhat the
decision has some inconsistencies and defended its decision
on the basis that inquiries into policy or implementation failure
are not the proper function of a legislature. It describes the
functions of legislature in purely legislative terms. In doing so
the court took a literal view of the role of the legislature which
it arguably need not have taken. The courts are not always so
literal in the functions of the different pillars of state, for
instance the Doherty judgement (see an analysis here) seemed
to understand the de facto nature of politics but not the de
jure allocation of responsibilities.
Of course we know that parliaments now rarely legislate (there
are good reasons why this power has shifted to the executive)
and the scrutiny function of government is far more important
for parliament. Furthermore we can probably point to failures
of oversight which allowed poor policy choices so the policy
oversight of government is something we would want any
reform to achieve.
In fact though nearly all established parliamentary
dem0cracies allow for ad hoc committees to investigate
matters of public importance they are rarely used. We can see
that there have been important uses of parliamentary inquiries
in Germany, Belgium and Portugal, these tend to be rare and
occur when there is a dispute within the government, or there
is a minority government. An exception to this is Germany
where the government can be investigated even when the
government is united and has a parliamentary majority. This is
because Germany allows inquiries take place on the proposal
of just 25 per cent of members of the Bundestag (subject to
some restrictions in numbers and to avoid vexatious inquiries).
The draft Bill published two weeks ago and the associated
memorandum set out the circumstances in which inquiries
could happen in Ireland. These show that only a majority in the
Oireachtas will cause an inquiry and the wording of the
amendment make it possible that the Oireachtas could not
even legislate to allow a minority cause a parliamentary
inquiry. Now why would any government allow the Oireachtas
investigate it? We saw the last governments investigations of
the Banking crisis which produced three very useful reports

(using the recent Commissions of Inquiry legislation)

specifically ruled out looking at the governments decisions on
the Bank Guarantee Scheme. Past inquiries have been
unsuitable (Abbeylara) or unnecessary, for instance the inquiry
into the fall of the Reynolds/ Spring government.
One can only imagine if the current members of the Oireachtas
got to question those who it wished to question, Sen
FitzPatrick would probably top the list. There would be queues
among TDs to shout at him and accuse him of everything
under the sun. And the setting would be quasi-judicial the
description of the inquiries in the draft bill allows for cross
examination paints a picture very much akin to a trial. As an
inquiry it would generate more heat than light. As a quasi-trial
it would be acceptable if the individuals being investigated has
recourse to the courts to protect their rights.
The amendment at the moment seems both ineffectual in
achieving its stated goals and dangerous in its curtailment of
individual rights. The government has inserted a clause that
gives so much power to the Oireachtas (government) that the
Oireachtas will not have to think as carefully as it might about
future inquiries.

Law Society of Ireland expresses concern

about Constitutional ...
Amendment on Parliamentary inquiries ... The proposed
amendment arose following a decision of the Supreme Court
in the ... Oireachtas, the very organ

Top legal experts call for

No vote in new poll
Michael Brennan and Dearbhail McDonald
PUBLISHED
24/10/2011

TANAISTE Eamon Gilmore yesterday

blamed lawyers who have profited from the
long-running tribunals for stirring up
opposition to the plan to give more
investigative powers to TDs and senators.
He came out strongly in favour of the referendum proposal
which will allow Oireachtas committees to summon people
before an inquiry and to make clear findings about their
actions.
Mr Gilmore said that a 'Yes' vote would allow Oireachtas
committees to carry out inquiries which had previously
taken years in the tribunals. And he criticised the "vested
interests" who were arguing for a 'No' vote.
"I think there is a good deal of scaremongering going on
but a lot of it is coming from particular sections of the
legal profession who have done very well financially from
the judicial tribunals in the past," he said.
But last night, eight former holders of the Attorney
General office made an unprecedented intervention in a
referendum debate to "strongly oppose" government plans
to reduce judges' pay and boost politicians' powers to hold
public inquiries.
Under the current draft legislation, investigators employed
by Oireachtas committees can be given the power to enter
houses to seize documents.
But they will have to obtain a search warrant from a
district court judge -- the same procedure currently in
place for the gardai. And this power is likely to be used as a
last resort -- only if individuals such as bankers refuse all
other requests to hand over documents.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny, who was attending a meeting of
EU leaders in Brussels yesterday, also backed giving more
powers to Oireachtas committees. He said it would allow
issues of public importance to be put under the spotlight
in a "public, cost-efficient and timely fashion".

But last night's intervention by eight former AGs is the

first time that such a group has banded together to oppose
government plans to change the Constitution.
Days before voters go to the polls to elect a new president
and vote on two new constitutional changes, the AGs -including Peter Sutherland, John Rogers and Michael
McDowell -- have issued a letter in which they "strongly
oppose" the two referendums.
The signatories also include Paul Gallagher, the immediate
past Attorney General who advised the Fianna Fail/Green
coalition that a referendum was needed to reduce judges'
pay.
The signatories are not opposed to the principle of
reducing judges pay, but say that a proposal to allow
proportionate reductions in judicial remuneration
"provides insufficient protection for the independence of
the judiciary".
They have also opposed the Oireachtas inquiries
amendment which, if passed, will allow politicians to
decide the balance of rights to be enjoyed by witnesses
who appear before them and against whom adverse
findings may be made.
"The proposal in relation to Oireachtas inquiries seriously
weakens the rights of individual citizens, firstly to protect
their good names, and secondly to have disputes between
themselves and the Oireachtas concerning their
constitutional rights decided by an independent judiciary,"
said the AGs in a letter issued to editors of several
newspapers.
Last night, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL)
which mounted the 'No' campaign to the inquiries
referendum, said that this latest intervention, coupled
with a 14pc drop in public support for the amendment,
was a "rebuke" to the Coalition.
"This has to be read as a firm rebuke to the Taoiseach and
Tanaiste for taking a stance which wilfully misrepresents
the legal content of the constitutional amendments," said
Mark Kelly of the ICCL.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/toplegal-experts-call-for-no-vote-in-new-poll26784986.html
Even to Rich Billiaire in media are Trying To
Shut Up TD,s Who Want to find out the truth
against Corruption and Robbery by These
perpetraitors in Ireland, Even judges in
Ireland are bought to Silence The media
because the Corporate media owner is
Corrupt and Dangerous and Likes to SUE
People,
As you can Read between The lines here for
yourself
The Court judge orders RTE news not To
Speak Out Against This corrupt Man who is
mentioned in article here

Read the PDF Doc Under here

The High Court has issued its written
judgment giving its reasons for granting
an injunction to Denis O'Brien and Irish
Bank Resolution Corporation against
RT.

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/do
b-v-rte-redacted-judgement.pdf
We voted no to this Referendum because
the Bankers were Never Going to Jail, and
by Voting for This it would have had no
justice what so ever but only to give judges
and DPP and Oireacthas and Government
more Contrl and Powers Against The irish

people and Help the bankers and

Developers and poliicians walk away from
justice scot Free, so we said No but They
Still went Ahead With the Inquiry But They
Failed the justice System too,
GENERAL SCHEME OF THE

HOUSES OF THE OIREACHTAS (POWERS OF INQUIRY)

BILL 2011

http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2011/09/201
10912headsofbill.pdf
THIRTIETH AMENDMENT OF THE
CONSTITUTION (HOUSES OF THE
OIREACHTAS INQUIRIES) BILL 2011
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28
/b4711d.pdf

Dearbhail McDonald:
Voters give stern backlash
to our arrogant leaders
PUBLISHED
31/10/2011

TAKE a bow Alan Shatter, the star of the

'No' campaign, whose arrogance contributed
to the defeat of the Oireachtas Inquiries
referendum.
=
1

Special plaudits too, to Eamon Gilmore and Brendan

Howlin for their intemperate supporting roles in this
spectacular political own-goal.
The real winner is the Irish electorate.

Irish constitutional
change may threaten
press freedom, says NUJ
Roy Greenslade
@GreensladeR
Tuesday 25 October 2011 15.44 BST

The Irish section of the National Union of Journalists has

registered its concern about a proposed amendment to the
Irish constitution, viewing it as a potential threat to press
freedom.
The 30th amendment gives powers to the Oireachtais
(Ireland's parliament) to institute inquiries into matters of
public importance.
These inquiries are supposed to "balance the rights of the
individual with the public interest."
But that has alarmed some journalists who are worried
that they may come under pressure to identify confidential
sources or to hand over confidential documents.
So Samus Dooley, the NUJ's Irish secretary, has written
to the chairman of the referendum commission seeking
clarification of the amendment's implications for
journalists.

Dooley said the union "would be concerned at the

prospect of the Oireachtais undermining the significant
advances made in relation to the rights of journalists to
protect confidential information in the public interest."
Ireland's supreme court has previously vindicated the right
of journalists to protect confidential sources.
Dooley has asked a series of questions to discover the
intentions of the Oireachtais, both houses of which have
blessed the amendment.
He is unlikely to get a reply before the people vote on the
matter because the referendum takes place on Thursday,
the same day as the presidential election.
But Dooley said: "In the event that the 30th amendment is
accepted by the electorate we will be seeking specific
commitments from government in relation to the protection
of confidential journalistic sources of information.
"The enabling bill could provide such protection but
ultimately it is for the courts to vindicate the Constitutional
rights of every citizen."

Noonan sends report on bank

crisis to Garda and DPP - Irish
Times
Minister Noonan, following a recent headline
in the Irish Times (quote below) may I
presume that you will be asking the DPP

(Director of Public Prosecution) to investigate

the conduct of UniCredit Ireland as well?
Should you require further information,
please see Village magazine's December
cover story:
Still waiting for the truth from the
regulator
http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/201
0/12/still-waiting-for-the-truth-from-theregulator/

PS
I was rather disappointed to receive the
email below which you had sent last
November. The person whom you sent it to
has contacted me via my blog. Pity you
can't remember the complaint you had
made about my conduct on the phone with
your secretary when I called to follow up
on a meeting I had had with one of your
prominent colleagues.
--------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Michael Noonan

Date: Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: Are Fine Gael complicit in
covering up a whistleblower's report?
To: ........
Dear M.,
Thank you for taking the time to write to me.

Unfortunately I have noknowledge of the

case you mention and I can assure you that
Fine Gael isnot complicit in a cover up of any
banking irregularities and I have notbeen
contacted by this whistleblower.
Best wishes.
Michael Noonan TDFine Gael Spokesperson
on Finance
The Irish Times
- Saturday, April 2, 2011

Noonan sends report on bank crisis to Garda and DPP

SIMON CARSWELL, Finance Correspondent
MINISTER FOR Finance Michael Noonan has referred the Nyberg
report into the banking crisis to the Garda, the Office of the
Director of Corporate Enforcement and the Director of Public
Prosecutions.
This is the first time a report on banking practices in all the
guaranteed lenders has been submitted to the Garda, the DPP
and the ODCE. A Department of Finance spokesman confirmed
the report had been referred on the advice of the Attorney
General. The Minister received the final report from the Nyberg
commission of investigation on March 22nd and referred it to
the Attorney General.
The commission, led by the former senior Finnish civil servant
Peter Nyberg, spent six months investigating the banking
crisis, examining Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide Building
Society in particular. Mr Nyberg was asked to investigate
corporate governance and risk management at the six
Government-guaranteed institutions from January 1st, 2003, to
January 15th, 2009, when the decision to nationalise Anglo was
taken.
The inquiry focused closely on lending practices at Anglo and
Irish Nationwide to examine why they incurred much heavier
losses.
Mr Nyberg did not name any individuals in his report, which
was commissioned by former minister for finance Brian
Lenihan.
It followed two reports into the causes of the crisis last year by
Central Bank governor Patrick Honohan and banking experts

Klaus Regling and Max Watson.

The Central Bank plans to examine bank directors records in
the run-up to the crisis and, if necessary, launch formal
investigations to suspend or prohibit individuals from
involvement with finance companies. The head of financial
regulation
Matthew Elderfield said on Thursday that he would write to
bank boards to give directors an opportunity to decide whether
they wanted to go through that examination process.
The ODCE and the Garda are already investigating issues
relating to Anglo including:
the 7 billion deposits between the bank and Irish Life and
Permanent which made Anglo look healthier than it actually
was over its September 2008 year end;
the secret share deal in which it made loans of 451 million
to 10 customers to buy a 10 per cent stake held by Sen
Quinn;
the concealment of loans to former chairman Sen
FitzPatrick over an eight-year period;
an 8 million loan given to a director, Willie McAteer, to
prevent his Anglo shares being sold on September 29th, 2008;
and
the content of financial and public statements in 2008.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2011/0402/1224
293651818.html

Ireland looks to Persian Gulf

to buy its banks
December 12, 2010

Top Irish officials have approached Persian Gulf

sovereign wealth funds to gauge interest in the
sale of Irelands banks after the 85 billion
(Dh412.26bn) bailout from European governments
and the IMF.

John Bruton, a former Irish prime minister, is

leading a delegation from the country on a
whistle-stop tour of the region as Ireland
prepares to sell assets.
Irish officials are visiting sovereign funds in

the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia,

where they have already met Prince Alwaleed
bin Talal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the chief of
Kingdom Holding and one of the worlds 20
richest men. Mr Bruton is the head of the
International Financial Services Centre in
Ireland, which aims to attract financial
companies to set up there.
The message was our banks are for sale to
any investors, foreign or local, said one
executive at a UAE sovereign wealth fund
who met the delegation this week.
The visit follows recent similar trips made by
groups from Greece and Spain seeking
investment in ailing financial institutions.
Mr Bruton said yesterday he was not
representing the Irish government in an
official capacity but discussing the general
situation and opportunities in the country,
including the potential sale of banks and
bank assets.
We are not here to facilitate the sale of any
assets or start any negotiations, said Bruton.
That is the governments decision and role,
but obviously discussions have taken place
about the Irish economy generally. The
central bank has clearly said asset sales are
being studied.
While the discussions were informal, he said
they could provide the basis for negotiations
between Ireland and the Persian Gulfs
wealthiest investors for future asset sales.
Others on the trip included officials from

Irelands Industrial Development Agency.

Brutons meetings come as Ireland faces
increasingly stark economic challenges
following the Celtic Tiger boom years in
which the economy expanded rapidly
between 1995 and 2007 before unraveling
because of excessive public and privatesector borrowing and the collapse of property
prices.
Fitch Ratings yesterday downgraded Irelands
sovereign rating to BBB-plus from A-plus
after accounting for the additional costs of
restructuring its struggling economy and
banking sector.
To reduce its debt, Ireland has embarked on
severe budgetary cost cutting and is drawing
up a list of assets it could sell to raise cash.
Its troubled banks, including Anglo Irish Bank,
Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish Banks, have
sold a large portion of their loan books to a
controversial government vehicle, the
National Asset Management Agency. It has
already acquired a large portion of the bad
debts accumulated by Irelands top lenders.
(Source Thenational.ae)

The EU Is Pushing
Ireland to the Brink of
Ruin

The Irish government has just passed its

fourth budget in two years. But the

drastic savings measures it contains will

not help the country's massive debt
problem. Some economists are now
predicting it is only a matter of time
before Ireland defaults.

December 08, 2010 01:15 PM

The sum is enormous: 6 billion ($7.9 billion)

is how much the Irish government wants to
cut from the public finances next year. The
drastic course of treatment, the fourth
budget in two years, was passed by the Irish
parliament late on Tuesday night. It will be a
huge test of strength for the small country:
The average Irish household will be 7,500
worse off by 2012, according to the Irish
Independent.
he Dublin government has been
congratulated and encouraged from across
the European Union for being so brave in
sticking to its austerity goals. The
unemployed, low-income workers,
pensioners, students -- hardly any sector of

society has been left unscathed.

Yet this huge national sacrifice will not
significantly improve the country's massive
debt problem. The sometimes severe cuts to
social welfare payments, public sector pay
and state investment pale into insignificance
when compared to the massive gaps in the
Irish banks' accounts. That is why investors
are continuing, undeterred, to speculate on
Ireland's eventual insolvency.
Irish Taxpayers Paying the Bill
The bailout loan of 85 billion that the EU,
the European Central Bank and the
International Monetary Fund agreed to
extend to Ireland just over a week ago had
failed to calm market jitters. And why would
it? After all, it actually exacerbates the
country's financial problems.
The EU has failed to make the foreign
bondholders take a hit on the losses from
toxic real estate loans. In particular, the ECB
insisted that the interests of the German,
British and French banks would continue to
be protected. Instead, Irish taxpayers are
being asked to pay the bill: at a hefty interest
rate of 5.8 percent, to ensure the foreign
creditors will get their money back rather
than face any losses.
That may be something German banks
welcome, but it is a disaster for Ireland. And
many economists now predicts that it is just
a question of time before the country
defaults. "This 'bailout' will sink the

Republic," warns economist David McWilliams

in the Belfast Telegraph. "It is the EU giving
us enough rope to hang ourselves in the
hope that we don't hang all of them."
If Ireland fully exhausts the EU bailout then it
will double the national debt to 175 billion
by 2014, he calculates, and the interest on
that would come to 8.5 billion a year -- more
than even the thriftiest of governments could
afford.
To make sure that the state does not drown in
its debts, the annual rate of growth has to be
significantly higher than the interest due on
the national debt, McWilliams argues. If the
Irish economy does not grow by 8-10 percent,
then the country will end in a debtdeflationary spiral. And even the most
optimistic government projections are just
below 4 percent.
Barry Eichengreen, a professor of economics
at the University of California, Berkeley,
makes a similar argument. It would be
neither politically nor economically
sustainable to force Ireland to pay 10 percent
of its national income as reparations to
bondholders, he wrote recently in German
business daily Handelsblatt, "as anyone who
remembers Germany's own experience with
World War I reparations should know." It
would be more sensible to have a debt
restructuring and offer the bondholders 20
cents on the euro, he argues.

Such a restructuring would with one fell

swoop cut the Irish public debt from 130
percent to 100 percent of GDP, he says. And
it would have shown the Irish that the
European Union was on their side, writes
Kevin O'Rourke, economics professor at
Trinity College Dublin, for the Eurointelligence
website. Instead the EU is forcing "procyclical adjustment onto countries that are
already sinking."
'We Face a Negative Spiral'
O'Rourke's prognosis is as foreboding as that
of his colleagues. "We now face a negative
spiral in which austerity causes emigration,
which increases the burden of the debt,
which ultimately leads to more austerity," he
writes. He recommends as a way out the
path pursued by Iceland. In a referendum,
the voters rejected a proposal to pay back
their banks' international creditors. Ireland,
O'Rourke argues, needs a "radical change."
The Irish government, however, is
determined to play according to the EU's
rules. It is above all about credibility on the
financial markets, argues Irish Finance
Minister Brian Lenihan, who was just named
Europe's worst finance minister by the
Financial Times.
The budget that he presented to the
parliament on Tuesday, a mix of cuts and tax
hikes, will just further depress an already
weak economy. And the cuts will continue:
According to the government's four-year

plan, which it unveiled in November, a total

of 15 billion will be cut by 2014.
It is, however, doubtful if the government will
be around long enough to implement its
plans. Although the budget itself passed
through the Dil, the Irish parliament, with
the backing of some independent
parliamentarians, the next government, due
to be elected in spring at the latest, will likely
make changes to the plan.
Ireland's Achilles' Heel
And the austerity measures will achieve little
if Ireland does not get a handle on the
problems with its banking sector. It is still the
country's Achilles' heel. Ever since the Irish
government's fatal decision to provide a
blanket guarantee for all debts and deposits
at the banks, the fate of the state has been
linked to that to the financial institutions. And
those toxic debts left over from the real
estate boom are still lurking in their
accounts.
The banks have already started erasing those
toxic debts from their books -- either by
moving them into the state's so-called bad
bank, NAMA, or by selling them on at a
discount price to investors. However, no one
has been able to calculate yet exactly how
high the losses are.
Of the 85 billion EU/IMF loan, 35 billion
alone is earmarked for the Irish banks. And
10 billion of that is to be a direct capital
injection, while the rest will be kept as an

emergency fund. Aside from the scandal-hit

Anglo-Irish bank, the country's two biggest
banks, Bank of Ireland and Allied Irish Bank,
will soon be majority-owned by the state.
The size of the EU/IMF bailout was calculated
on the basis that the banks could bear a
default of up to 10 percent on all mortgages.
This super-stress scenario would cost around
15 billion, according to the Irish financial
regulators. The rescue package would suffice
for that.
However, the high interest rates mean that
Ireland has no prospect of paying back the
loan. There remains only the hope that the
government won't have to avail of all the
funds. But no expert believes that this will be
possible -- after all, the Irish banks have
repeatedly sought fresh capital over recent
months.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/drastic-cuts-andpunitive-interest-rates-the-eu-is-pushing-ireland-to-the-brink-of-ruina-733522.html

EU Agrees on MultiBillion Rescue Package

for Ireland
Ireland has formally asked the European
Union for financial assistance, and EU
finance ministers have approved the
aid. The size of the rescue package is
not yet clear, but it could be up to 100

billion euros. The junior partner in

Ireland's ruling coalition, the Green
Party, has called for an early election in
January.

November 22, 2010 09:10 AM

Just a few days ago, Ireland was insisting that

it would not need a financial rescue package
from the European Union. Now Dublin has
changed its tune. On Sunday, the Irish
government officially requested help from the
EU and the International Monetary Fund
(IMF). Europe's finance ministers quickly
agreed to the aid in a hastily convened
telephone conference on Sunday evening.
Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen said on
Sunday a package of less than 100 billion
($137 billion) had been agreed on in
principle. Its main aim will be to support
Ireland's ailing banks. EU and IMF experts
had arrived in Ireland on Thursday to
examine the country's books to get a sense
of what kind of assistance Ireland would

require.
The news agency Reuters quoted senior
sources in the EU as saying the package
would total 80 billion-90 billion. The EU's
Commissioner for Economic and Monetary
Affairs Olli Rehn said that the exact amount
would be decided at the end of November
after further negotiations.
'Misled and Betrayed'
The bailout threatened to plunge Ireland into
a political crisis on Monday as the junior
partner in the ruling coalition, the Green
Party, called for a general election in January
to give the Irish people "political certainty." It
said it would pull out of government once the
government had agreed all the necessary
fiscal measures and secured financial
support.
The past week has been a traumatic one for
the Irish electorate. People feel misled and
betrayed," the Green Party said in a
statement.
The coalition of Fianna Fail, the Greens and
independent politicians has a parliamentary
majority of three and faces a December 7
vote on a rigorous package of austerity
measures.
Opening Statement by Mr. Frank Daly,
Chairman of NAMA Public Accounts
Committee Thursday, 1 October 2015
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/co
mmittees/pac/correspondence/2015meeting1700110/PAC-R-1939-

Correspondence-3C.1---Frank-Daly-OpeningStatement-NAMA.pdf
From- NAMA OIR To- Cc- NAMA OIR Subject- Sale of NAMA ... ...
Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) ... had access to confidential
information but the NAMA Board determined that this arrangement
could undermine the integrity

http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/1
9.%2009-07-2015%20NAMA%20to%20DoF
%20Email%20re%20NI%20Sale.pdf
minister@finance.gov.ie"; "paul.bolger@finance.gov.ie" NAMA OIR
Sale of NAMA Northern Ireland loan portfolio
09 July 2015 11:17:23
Frank Daly - Opening Address to the PAC - 9 July 2015.pdf

Opening Statement by Mr. Brendan

McDonagh, Chief Executive of NAMA Public
Accounts Committee Thursday, 9 July 2015
https://www.nama.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/B
rendan_McDonagh_Opening_Address_PAC_9_J
uly_2015.pdf
Attachments- Frank Daly - Opening Address
to the PAC - 9 July 2015.pdf Brendan
McDonagh - Opening Address to the PAC - 9
July 2015
http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/2
2%20-%2011-07-2015%20Briefing
%20Materials%20-%20Project%20Eagle
%20Email%20to%20NAMA_1.pdf
Frank Daly - Opening Address to the PAC - 9 July 2015.pdf;
Brendan McDonagh -Opening Address to the PAC - 9 July
2015.pdf ... and NAMA Chief Executive's opening ...

http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/6
4.%202015-07-09%20Email%20re%20Sale
%20of%20NAMA%20Northern%20Ireland
%20loan%20portfolio.pdf

Opening Address by Mr. Brendan

McDonagh, ... Public Accounts Committee
Thursday, 5 July 2012 ... In this brief opening
address,
https://namawinelake.files.wordpress.com/20
12/07/pac5jul12.pdf
Ann Nolan; Paul Bolger; Alex Lalor; Brendan Loughnane; ...
Opening Address to the PAC - 9 July 2015.pdf; Brendan
McDonagh Opening
http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/files/06.%20Brie
fing%20Materials%20-%20Project%20Eagle%20%20Sale%20of%20NAMA%20Northern%20Ireland
%20loan%20portfolio%20Email.pdf
Opening Statement by Mr. Frank Daly, Chairman of
NAMA, to the Public Accounts Committee Thursday, 24
November 2016

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/co
mmittees/pac/correspondence/2016meetings
/meeting16-24112016/PAC32-R-198-A--Frank-Daly-Opening-Address-to-PAC24.11.2016.pdf
Report of the Joint Committee of Inquiry into
the Banking Crisis
https://inquiries.oireachtas.ie/banking/wpcontent/uploads/2016/01/02106-HOI-BEReport-Volume1.pdf
REPORT of the Joint Committee of Inquiry into
the Banking Crisis Houses of the Oireachtas
(Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act,
2013
https://inquiries.oireachtas.ie/banking/wpcontent/uploads/2016/01/02106-IBC-ReportVolume-2.pdf

Tens of Billions Needed

The EU's finance ministers immediately
agreed in principle to a rescue package on
Sunday evening. "We welcomed the request
of the Irish government for financial
assistance from the European Union and the
International Monetary Fund," Rehn said.
"Providing assistance to Ireland is warranted
to safeguard the financial stability in Europe."
He said experts from the EU, IMF and the
European Central Bank would prepare a
three-year package of loans by the end of the
month, which would "address both the fiscal
challenges of the Irish economy and the
potential future capital needs of the banking
sector in a decisive manner."
Justifying the request for help, Irish Finance
Minister Brian Lenihan had said earlier on
Sunday that his country had accumulated a
deficit of 19 billion that it could not currently
refinance on the financial markets. He said
tens of billions of euros were probably
needed to help ailing banks in the country,
but insisted it would not be a "three-figure
sum."
Lenihan insisted however that Ireland's low
12.5 percent corporate tax would not be
touched, despite calls from other European
politicians for the tax rate to be raised.
The United Kingdom and Sweden, which are
not euro-zone members, have also said they
will provide bilateral aid to Ireland. British

Chancellor George Osborne has agreed to

pay 7.5 billion pounds (8.8 billion or $12
billion) toward the bailout.
'Have Faith'
On Sunday, Prime Minister Cowen called on
the Irish people to "act together in the
national interest." "To the Irish people I say
simply this: We should not underestimate the
scale of our economic problems, but we must
have faith in our ability as a people to
recover and prosper once more."
Speaking on Germany's ZDF television ahead
of the ministers' conference, German Finance
Minister Wolfgang Schuble said that helping
Ireland could prevent the debt crisis
spreading to other countries. "We are not
defending just one euro-zone member," he
said. "We are defending the stability of our
common currency."
German Economy Minister Rainer Brderle
said that the economic recovery in Germany
was not threatened by the Irish crisis. "If help
is provided for Ireland, that will not put the
upturn in Germany in danger," he told the
newspaper Bild.
Markets seemed to react well to the news.
The euro increased in value on Monday
morning, as did many Asian stocks.
Pressure to Accept Help
Pressure on the Irish government to accept
EU help had increased in recent days, in the
hope that a rescue package would reassure
the markets. Although the government does

not need to immediately refinance its debt,

Ireland's problems have caused turbulence
on the financial markets. Other beleaguered
euro-zone countries such as Greece and
Spain have seen their borrowing costs climb
as a result, with rises in spreads on Irish,
Greek, Portuguese and Italian government
bonds.
Losses at five Irish banks have required a 45
billion bailout from the government at a time
when tax revenues are significantly down due
to the recession. The bank bailout has
cannibalized the public finances, pushing the
public deficit temporarily to 32 percent of
GDP for 2010, 10 times that allowed by EU
rules.
The Irish rescue package is the EU and IMF's
second massive bailout this year, after the
110-billion rescue of Greece in May.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/massive-bailout-euagrees-on-multi-billion-rescue-package-for-ireland-a-730358.html

NAMA rejects disingenuous, implausible

allegations made under Dail privilege by
Deputy Mick Wallace, Chairman tells
Public Accounts Committee
(
(
(

Deputy Wallace comments "a serious misrepresentation

of the facts"
"Utterly disingenuous" to suggest NAMA accepted less
than it could have received for sale of the Northern Ireland loan

portfolio
UK National Crime Agency "not in any way concerned"
with NAMAs role in Project Eagle sale

(
The Chairman of the National Asset Management Agency
(NAMA) has today strongly rejected allegations made over a
protracted period this year under Dail privilege by Deputy Mick
Wallace.
Speaking at the Oireachtas Public Accounts Committee, Frank
Daly said:
(
(
(
(

(
(

Certain allegations made by Deputy Wallace were "a

serious misrepresentation of the facts";
It was "utterly disingenuous" to suggest NAMA could have
sold its Northern Ireland loan portfolio (Project Eagle) for 50pc
of its par value when the average value was only 27pc; and
It was "totally unrealistic" to suggest NAMA could recover
the par value of these loans within a reasonable timeframe if it
retained ownership of the portfolio.

(
Mr Daly also confirmed to the Committee that the UKs National
Crime Agency "is not in any way concerned" with NAMAs role in
the sale of Project Eagle. He said:
"The Chief Executive and I met the UKs National Crime Agency
some weeks ago and provided them with an overview of NAMA
and the chronology around the sale of Eagle. It is our clear
understanding, based on that engagement, that their
investigation is not in any way concerned with the NAMA sale
side of the transaction.
Their focus appears to be very much on the purchase side and
what may or may not have taken place in Northern Ireland."

Mr Daly also reiterated the Agencys long-standing position in

respect of Project Eagle:
(
The loan sales process was well-managed and competitive
(
The sale was conducted in line with international best practice,
independently overseen by Lazard, a major international
investment bank
(
The integrity of the sales process was fully protected
(
No external members of the Northern Ireland Advisory
Committee (NIAC) had access to confidential information on
the sale
(
All bidders had equal access to information
(
No third parties (political or otherwise) had influence over the
NAMA Boards decision on Project Eagle or were in a position to
confer an unfair competitive advantage on any bidder
(
Mr Daly also highlighted recent media reports that were
"without foundation" and criticised commentators who have
remained silent on "implausible" claims.
He also called on any individual who uses privilege to make
claims of wrongdoing to pass on "accurate and reliable"
information to NAMA and/or the appropriate authorities for
investigation.
"On a more general note, it is difficult for NAMA or indeed any
organisation to properly address allegations where such
allegations are vague or implausible and where no evidence is
produced to support them," he said.

"If those making such allegations genuinely believe that the

information that has been passed on to them is indeed
accurate and reliable, we would again urge that they pass it on
to us or to the appropriate authorities so that it can be
objectively investigated.
If a criminal act is alleged to have been committed, they are of
course obliged to report such matters to the Gardai under
section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 2011."

Sale of Project Eagle by NAMA

threaten the careers and reputation
of its chairman and chief executive
The current Public Accounts Committee hearings into the
sale of Project Eagle by NAMA threaten the careers and
reputation of its chairman and chief executive, the finance
minister, Michael Noonan, the Comptroller and Auditor
General and a number of politicians on both sides of the
border. This explains why we are witnessing a war of
words across the print and broadcast media pitting NAMA
against its perceived enemies.
Public enemy number one in this conflict is the Wexford
TD, Mick Wallace, no stranger to controversy but not
immune to the hurt that comes with incessant criticism of
his motives, his methods and the manner in which he
tackles head-on the unfairness he perceives in many
aspects of Irish life.
His public clashes with NAMA chairman Frank Daly and
chief executive Brendan McDonagh are likely to intensify
over the coming months of inquiries, including a promised
Commission of Investigation into Project Eagle and
possibly other aspects of the agencys disposal of billions

of euro of distressed property assets.

Over recent weeks, Wallace has been accused of making
unfounded allegations against the two senior NAMA
executives on more than one occasion, including at the
PAC hearing on Thursday, 29 September, last. McDonagh
in particular has been incensed at what he believes is
Wallaces deliberate misleading of the public with
incorrect statements and false claims.
During his evidence to the PAC, McDonagh said that it
was completely untrue that US fund, Fortress, had been
excluded from making a bid for the 4.5bn Project Eagle
portfolio in early 2014 and only made the short list after
making an eleventh hour intervention to the Department of
the Taoiseach. The portfolio was of course sold to US
fund, Cerberus, for 1.24bn.
The following day Wallace posted an email from Michael
George, managing director of Fortress, to Andrew
McDowell in Enda Kennys office dated 13 February, 2014.
It read: Weve heard that NAMA/Dept of Finance is
running a process for the loans to Northern Irish
borrowers. Being from the North Ive taken a keen interest
in this 4bn portfolio and would like to throw our hat in the
ring. Might you have any insight as to how we can get
involved?.
McDowell replied that he had asked Martin Whelan of
NAMA to put George in touch with the right officials, to
which the Fortress managing director replied:
Thanks Andrew. FYI Ive also reached out to Bren
(McDonagh).
According to NAMA, it was the direct approach to

McDonagh and not the request to the most senior official

in the Taoiseachs department that prompted the late
invitation to Fortress to join the race for Project Eagle.
McDonagh said that he passed the request from George
to Lazards, the external advisor on the sale, which
contacted Fortress later on the same day, 13 February.
NAMA has recently been forced to correct Deputy
Wallace in respect of incorrect statements he has made in
respect of the Fortress bid and it is regrettable that he is
compounding this situation by making further false claims
now, NAMA said. The problem for NAMA is that the
complaint about having to contact the Taoiseachs
department to get into the process came from Mike
George and he made it to various people in politics and
business, north and south.
The increasing bitterness of the exchanges is also
reflected in the coverage by some news outlets which
have sided with NAMA in its row with Wallace. Over recent
weeks, The Sunday Times and the Irish Daily Mail have
published lengthy and detailed criticisms of Wallace
comparing him (a tax cheat) unfavourably with
McDonagh (an honourable public servant) among other,
less than complimentary, remarks.
It is understood that McDonagh and his media advisors
have spent a considerable amount of time briefing
journalists with their side of the Project Eagle story.
Conversely, the Sunday Independent has been running
various claims and revelations by Wallace over recent
weeks and months. This contrasts with coverage in the
Irish Independent which, with the exception of Gerry

Adams, singled out Wallace for its most sustained

vilification in advance of the general election this year. The
Irish Times has belatedly accepted that its coverage of
Project Eagle and related NAMA stories has been too
tame and uncritical in the past and has given an airing to
the Wexford TD.

Hercules/Wallace grapples Cerberus

An apparent desperation in the NAMA media operation

was well illustrated by its attack on the Comptroller and
Auditor General, Seamus McCarthy, who it claimed was
not up to the job of scrutinising the Project Eagle sale. The
media reported it as a row between two state agencies
rather than what it was; a detailed and critical report by its
auditor of NAMA: an auditor whose previous value for
money reports on the agencys work was never subjected
to such an attack. It was only when the CAG said that the
Project Eagle portfolio was sold for some 190m less than

it could have been that it was targeted by NAMA for attack.

In fact, while NAMAs purchase price for the portfolio was
2.2bn, for what was a par value of 4.5bn, it was
eventually sold for just over 1.3bn, one of NAMAs
biggest losses.
The attack tactic did not go down well with most members
of the PAC, nor with Wallace, who was present for the full
day hearing although he is not a member of the
committee. Neither did the sometimes unconvincing
claims by McDonagh about the Project Eagle sale to US
fund, Cerberus. It was Wallace who first disclosed that
15m in fees were to be paid by Cerberus to US lawyers,
Brown Rudnick and Belfast law firm Tughans. Wallace also
told the Dil in July 2015 that 7m had been located
offshore in an Isle of Man account in connection with this
payment and that some of it was intended for a politician
or political party in the North. A former member of NAMAs
Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC), Frank
Cushnahan has since been secretly recorded stating that
he is due 5m for his work on the sale.
In an extraordinary moment at the PAC last week,
McDonagh claimed that he did not know that Brown
Rudnick and Tughans were working for Cerberus until 3
April, 2014, after the Project Eagle sale was completed.
It seems extraordinary that NAMA did not know who the
legal advisors to Cerberus were until after the Project
Eagle portfolio was sold, Wallace told Village.
Brown Rudnick and Tughans were the advisors to
PIMCO until they pulled out of the deal on the legal advice
of their compliance department who considered that the

agreed fee arrangements were in breach of US law. That

was just weeks before the deal was done with Cerberus. If
the senior executives of NAMA did not know who the legal
advisors to Cerberus were, then someone should be fired
for incompetence at least.
It also raises the question as to who was really running
the show. According to both Daly and McDonagh at the
PAC, the data room where all the detailed information was
made available to bidders was controlled by the head of
asset recovery, Ronnie Hanna, Wallace said.
Hanna was arrested by members of the National Crime
Agency in Belfast last May along with Cushnahan and
solicitor Ian Coulter, formerly of Tughans, as part of the
police investigation into the Project Eagle purchase. None
of the three has been charged and their bail restrictions
were lifted recently.
Wallace continued: I am not convinced that the PAC can
get to the bottom of this given that it is restricted to the
parameters of the CAG report. The CAG has done a
thorough investigation but he is limited to an auditing or
value for money exercise. His report has highlighted a
number of weaknesses in relation to the process the
restricted number of tenders, the question of access to the
data room where some clearly had more than others and
the conflict of interests evident in Cushnahans role as
NIAC member. He was acting as a consultant for a
number of NAMA debtors. It is not enough to say that
everything was rosy because he did not deliver anything
for these debtors. The CAG says there should have been
more questions asked about Cushnahan given the

conflicts he had himself disclosed to NAMA. And why was

he meeting prospective buyers with Hanna and
accountant David Watters, before the Project Eagle
portfolio was put up for sale?.
Neither is Wallace convinced that the Commission of
Investigation will get off the ground any time soon.
I would not take it for granted that it will be set up anytime
soon. I think Fine Gael will brazen it out for as long as they
can and Fianna Fil dont want an inquiry. Any
investigation has to go beyond Project Eagle, which is just
one of the many portfolios. The problems with how NAMA
has done its business run right through the organisation,
he told Village.
Wallace has learned more about NAMA from anonymous
contributions to his new website namaleaks.ie although he
is conscious that every claim and allegation needs to be
verified.
There are people with agendas and grudges out there.
But we do not just swallow everything we are told.
Everything must be checked. Neither am I being fed a line
by one or two disgruntled developers as NAMA has
suggested. Ive been blamed for a lot of things but
stupidity is not one of them, he says.
Problems relating to NAMA that are gradually coming into
the public domain are very worrying. Not just because of
the billions of euro that the organisation may have cost the
Irish people but because there are issues at play that go to
the heart of how we do business in Ireland.
The election of Donald Trump is just the latest headache
for an already precariously balanced Irish government.

The election of the man whose words were described as

racist and dangerous by Enda Kenny just a few months
ago does not in itself pose an imminent threat to the
Taoiseachs political survival but it certainly intensifies the
political and economic uncertainty already heightened by
Brexit.
While most Irish people would agree with the sentiments
expressed by Kenny during the US election campaign in
response to Trumps consistent attacks on immigrants,
women, minorities and the disabled, it may not have been,
in hindsight, the cleverest thing in the world for the
Taoiseach to express such forthright opinions about a
possible incumbent of the White House.
No wonder he was on the phone to The Donald less than
twenty-fours hours of the shock US presidential result to
ensure that the door will still be open when he brings the
bowl of shamrock to Washington in March.
It would not be so awkward for Kenny if he was not already
under pressure to set a date for his departure as leader of
his party and the government. And it will have to be both,
despite the kite he has recently flown about staying on as
Taoiseach while relinquishing the leadership of Fine Gael.
He has already claimed at various times that his
experience is needed to navigate the turbulent waters
following Brexit but he cant have any such illusions about
the impact of the latest international shock to the Irish
economy from the promised Trump era.
The most immediate is Trumps promise to reduce
domestic corporation tax from 35% to 15% with its
inevitable consequence for Irish tax revenues from

multinationals but others include his threat to deport

undocumented immigrants and to place obstacles on
young people making study and work trips to the States.
Not to mention the knock-on effect of his victory for the
election of extreme right-wing forces in France, the
Netherlands, Italy and possibly Germany if the refugee
flow persists, over the coming year.

Time to take Kenny and Noonan away

Kenny knows he is hanging on by a thread and the rival

contenders for leadership will almost certainly intensify
their campaigns in the new year with the expectation of a
contest by late Spring, if not before.
Neither can Michael Noonan expect to receive any
retrospective laurels from his cringe-making welcome for
president-elect Trump on his arrival in Shannon in 2014.
Whatever about Kenny the finance minister is a political
dead-man walking, for a number of reasons.
In the week before Budget Day in October, according to a
number of flies on the wall in Merrion Street, there was the

usual flurry of activity and panic in the Department of

Finance as the big day approached. Except the nerves of
officials were frayed, not by the well flagged budget, but by
the ministers date with the Public Accounts Committee
days later where his role in the Project Eagle affair was to
come under scrutiny.
Noonan had been informed by NAMA executives, in March
2014, of the dodgy fee payments associated with the
planned sale by the agency of its 5.6 bn Northern Ireland
property portfolio to US fund, Pimco. While Pimco
withdrew from the sale on the advice of its compliance
team the sale went ahead to Cerberus who paid just
1.24bn for the commercial and property assets just
weeks later.
Although he protests otherwise, Noonan could have made
known his reservations about continuing the sales process
in the light of the shocking information about backhanders
to legal and other insiders, including a former advisor to
NAMA, but did not do so.
It then emerged that Cerberus was represented by US firm
Brown Rudnick, the same law firm that acted for Pimco.
And that Brown Rudnick along with Belfast solicitors,
Tughans, and a number of others including Frank
Cushnahan a former member of the agencys Northern
Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) were due to receive
15m between them in success fees from Cerberus for
their assistance with securing the deal. Former NI first
minister, Peter Robinson was also named a possible
recipient in the arrangements.
At the early October meeting of the PAC, Noonan

defended his position and argued that he was not legally

empowered to interfere with the NAMA sale. He rounded
on committee members, notably Mary Lou McDonald of
Sinn Fein, who clearly got under his skin when she
questioned his failure to intervene. He tetchily reminded
her that her colleague, Martin McGuinness, the deputy
first minister had not expressed any concerns over the
recommendation of Cushnahan as a member of the NIAC
by former Stormont finance minister, Sammy Wilson in
2010.
He told Fianna Fil members of the PAC that it was their
man, the late Brian Lenihan, who had passed on
Cushnahans name to NAMA as an appropriate
appointment to the NIAC at the time.
However, nothing could disguise Noonans discomfort at
being subjected to detailed questions about his role in the
controversy over his hours of evidence during which he
was accused of bluster by McDonald.
His reputation as a financial guru who has safely steered
the ship through the Troika years into economic recovery
has also been severely dented not least by his
miscalculation of the available fiscal space or financial
reserves in the Fine Gael election manifesto earlier this
year and over his dithering on the question of the massive
tax avoidance by US multinationals and vulture funds.
When the full extent of the climb down in the face of the
Garda threat of all out strike became known on the eve of
the mass walk out by AGSI and GRA members of the
force, Noonan commented that he was taken aback by the
potential 50m-plus cost of the eleventh-hour deal

proposed by the Workplace Relations Commission.

But nobody, in government not to mind opposition,
believes that the finance minister would not have been
aware of the concessions on pay, overtime and allowances
given to the Garda to avert their industrial action.
Whatever about secondary teachers, Fine Gael in
government was determined to protect its law and order
credentials no matter what the cost to its public-service
pay strategy.
The bill is potentially huge and the most immediate threat
to government stability and finances. The debacle has
incensed the most ambitious of those keen to take over as
party leader, Leo Varadkar, who has insisted that none of
the monies to pay for expected public service pay
restoration will come from his social-welfare budget
allocation, a view echoed by most in cabinet.
Negotiations with the Public Service Committee of the Irish
Congress of Trade Unions will commence early in the new
year on a new deal to replace the now-holed Lansdowne
Road Agreement not least to avert a series of pay and
other claims from nurses, junior doctors and others who
are tempted to follow the lead of the guards. They will also
have to ensure that provisions in Lansdowne Road to
protect thousands of low-paid health, local authority and
other workers from outsourcing, an agenda never far from
the bureaucrats in government buildings, are maintained in
any new deal.
Public-sector pay is not the only storm on the horizon with
the deepening crisis in the health system ready to engulf
patients and hospital staff over the winter months, the

continuing housing and homelessness scandal, more of

the annual flooding that ruins the lives of so many people
in the west and south and the inevitable tantrums that
emanate from nervous members of the Independent
Alliance who are keeping the weak coalition in power.
Then of course there is the problem of Fianna Fil, which
knows that it can only keep this government on a life
machine for so long until it realises that its electoral
prospects are being more damaged than protected by the
so-called confidence and supply arrangement. Many of its
TDs are nervous of the consequences of agreeing a
second budget with the government given the lack of any
bounce it received from the minimal improvements in
social welfare, tax and other benefits from the first one of
three they are tied into.
Michel Martin and his troops also know that one of their
strongest cards as they face into any new election is Enda
Kenny. If Fine Gael replaces Kenny (along with Noonan,
most likely on health grounds), with a new, younger leader
then all bets are off. Like Bertie, a trip to Washington for St
Paddys Day may be the Mayo mans swan song with an
election to follow within months. The sooner the better, you
might say.
.g1-column

A man walks into a bar and orders a pint. The bartender

turns to him and says: 36.80 please. Thinking this must
be a mistake, the man asks the bartender why his drink is
so expensive. Well, says the barman, there was people

in here earlier who got a meal and a few drinks, but they
didnt pay. We have to pass the cost on to the next
customer.
This is not a joke punchline, but one of several real
interactions between a barman and some of his punters,
recorded in a Dublin pub as part of a hidden-camera
video, to promote Oxfams #MakeTaxFair campaign.
Oxfam says the campaigns purpose is to highlight the
injustice of tax deals that assist multinationals, and bring
inequality and economic hardship to the societies in which
these companies operate.
The video alluringly titled Irelands Most Expensive
Pint? and shared on Facebook brings the campaign to a
social media audience, and in just over two minutes offers
an entertaining simplification of the effects of tax
avoidance.
Shots of different customers and the unreasonable
barman induce incredulity, and comical threats of violence
follow. The barman asks his customers if they think its
unfair. Of course its unfair, comes the chimed response.
But the campaign has an unintended side-effect: by
ridiculing tax avoidance, it draws down questions of
sweeping stringency about the arrangements of Oxfam
itself, a multinational, albeit a multinational NGO with
Charitable Exemption Status.
Every single day, we end up paying for those who dont
pick up our tab, says the barmans voice at the end of the
video, before hes seen biting symbolically into an apple as
if at a dysfunctional iPhone launch.

What gives Oxfam the right to say how other companies

should pay taxes?
Might it be its agenda?
Well it is not the purpose of this article to take any issue
with Oxfams dynamic and progressive agenda. So its not
about that.
These ads arent about that agenda, theyre about tax
avoidance, tax cleverality.
So it can only be its approach to tax in itself. It must be
because it has a discrete and separate agenda beyond
relief of global poverty about tax. Sure enough, and
unfortunately for Oxfam, it makes this argument itself in its
own promotional video. The campaign is #MakeTaxFair
not MakeEverythingFair, after all.
So Oxfam can expect, like those it judges, to be held to
the highest standards of tax scrupulousness.
In the wake of the release of the Panama Papers, Oxfams
Irish CEO Jim Clarken made impassioned calls for the
closure of legal loopholes that allow companies to avoid
paying tax.
It is not good enough to argue that tax avoidance is
permissible because practices fall within the letter of the
law, he told the Irish Times. All governments, rich and
poor, must work to end tax dodging because it is their

citizens their electorate who are the biggest losers.

Oxfam is no petty player: it is respected and pioneering.
Oxfams Irish subsidiary owns almost 4m worth of assets,
had an income of 12m last year, and pays its CEO, Jim
Clarken, 90,000 a year.
So what does Oxfam do about its own tax?
Oxfams retail operations, on which it made just under 1m
last year, evoke an interesting comparison to how
multinationals pay tax, as both Oxfam and its more
capitalistic global peers are affected by commercial rates
of tax under Irish law.
Perhaps controversially in the context of the #MakeTaxFair
campaign, Oxfam has lobbied the Government, as a
member of the Irish Charity Shops Association, to have its
retail trading exempted from such rates.
Its tax arrangements in the UK have generated
controversy. Richard Teather of Bournemouth University is
one critic, arguing that Oxfam and other UK-based
charities make use of legal loopholes that look
remarkably like tax avoidance to avoid paying
commercial rates on their shops there.
Outlining Oxfams more general modus operandi for the
Institute of Economic Affairs, Teather describes how,
instead of managing their own shops, charities control
their retail operations through a private subsidiary, which
then donates its annual profits back to their parent
company under a scheme called Gift Aid.
Set up by the British Government under the Finance Act
1990, Gift Aid was originally intended to encourage
taxpayers to donate more money to charity, and works by

allowing a charity to claim 25% back on donations made

by anyone subject to UK income tax as a form of rebate
from the Government, effectively increasing the amount of
the donation. In 2006, the scheme was extended to
include the operation of charity shops.
In Oxfams case, the parent company (Oxfam
International) owns Oxfam Activities Ltd. (OAL), whose
primary activity is listed as the recovery of sorted
materials. Last year, OAL donated 783,000 to its parent
company, tax-free.
Beyond rates and UK-government-encouraged tax
rebates, the way Oxfam has seized on news items that
have highlighted tax avoidance in the past also opens it to
accusations of hypocrisy.
But what would hypocrisy look like for Oxfam?
We must distinguish two things. Firstly ends from means.
And secondly philanthropy from profit-making.
Its a mistake to cloud the morality of tax avoidance in
terms of ends and means, to believe that charities should
get a free pass because of their benevolence. It cannot be
the case that if the end is a good one it is legitimate to be
tax-avoiding in pursuit of it.
For example: Oxfams end is excellent; BPs goal is not
good; Apples is in between. So a certain logic might
suggest tax avoidance is merited on a sliding scale that
reflects this. But this should not be the case any more than
the tax system can be tailored so the benevolent and the
wise are levied for less than the malign or profit-obsessed.
Such argumentation cuts across the very essence of the
fairness of the system. If certain activities or individuals

merit favourable treatment it must be effected by

exemptions, grants and other policy measures, not by
allowing them to game the system, by avoidance.
To promote its agenda, which includes paying its own staff
and executives, Oxfam has seized on one of the issues of
our time, tax avoidance and made it its own. Seizing on
topical scandals from corruption to inequality to famine
to climate change to tax avoidance is largely how charities
get ahead.
Highlighting the ramifications of multinational tax
avoidance could be seen as particularly rewarding for
charity, in Ireland. In October, the majority of respondents
to an Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll said they agreed with
the Governments decision to appeal the ruling which
deprives the Irish taxpayer of 13bn, before interest.
Charities like Oxfam campaign for accountability and
legitimacy. One of the tenets of the #MakeTaxFair
campaign is to urge visitors to Oxfams website to sign a
petition, which urges Michael Noonan to publicise the tax
arrangements that Irish-based companies have with other
countries, in the hope of achieving greater transparency.
The #MakeTaxFair campaign is one of the better examples
of a charity adding insight and expertise to the public
discourse in a sustained way, highlighting the
consequences of tax avoidance in countries like Malawi,
where a generous double-taxation treaty signed with the
UK in 1955, when the country was still a British colony,
has created wide-scale inequality that has seen it become
the worlds poorest nation.
Figures from the Malawian government show it lost $125m

in tax allowances between 2008 and 2009 alone, equal to

the government spends annually on its national grain
subsidy, and recent comments from Malawian president
Peter Mutharika decried the effect that multinational tax
evasion is having on the country. Its a case that has been
almost entirely ignored by Western media.
Oxfams own website explains the crippling effect that a
lack of funding is having on public services in Malawi,
while a campaign by another charity, ActionAid, revealed
earlier this year that the doctor-to-patient ratio in Malawi is
roughly 1 to 60,000 (in Ireland its about 1 to 370, itself
below the OECD average).
This is not to suggest that tax fairness offers a sure-shot
solution to such problems, but funding issues in countries
like Malawi would certainly be resolved if their systems of
taxation were made fairer. According to figures from the
IMF, tax-avoidance schemes cost developing countries
roughly $200bn a year more than they collectively
receive in foreign aid.
Oxfam Irelands accounts show that last year it donated
over 325,000 to projects in Malawi, more than a third of
the net profit made from the charitys commercial trading
activity here. Providing charities with the means to pay
less tax on their retail operations, through incentives like
Gift Aid, could arguably increase this figure.
Oxfams ostensible hypocrisy comes at a time when
scandals in the charity sector have put the benefits that
they receive under further scrutiny. Questions surrounding
the legitimacy and accountability of charities since this
summers Console scandal have been reflected in the

drop in donations since, with one in three charities polled

by umbrella organisation, The Wheel, reporting a
significant drop in donations.
It is a terrible mistake that Oxfam, one of the most
respected charities has unnecessarily opened up a front
for criticism.
They might not make your pint cheaper, but campaigns to
make tax fair can ultimately reduce exploitation, increase
accountability, and enable developing countries to achieve
greater legitimacy and the ability to make their own
decisions.
However, if the proponents of tax fairness dont practise it,
the campaigns risk setting the goals back. In the case of
Oxfam it is probably fair to say that, in Clarkins terms, it
engages in avoidance, though not of course in (illegal)
evasion.
To say the least Oxfam needs to be careful.

.g1-column

Since the start of the Global Financial Crisis back in 2008,

European and US policymakers and regulators have
blamed the international banking system for systemic risks
and abuses. Regulatory and supervisory authorities have
begun designing and implementing system-wide
responses to the causes of the crisis. What emerged from

these efforts was an explosion of regulatory authorities.

Regulatory, supervisory and compliance jobs
mushroomed, turning legal and compliance departments
into a new Klondike, mining the rich veins of regulations,
frameworks and institutions. The edifice, it was presumed,
would address the causes of the recent crisis and create
systems that can robustly prevent future financial
meltdowns.
At the forefront of these global reforms are the EU and the
US which took two distinct approaches to beefing up their
responses to the systemic crises. Yet, the outrun of the
reforms is the same.
The US has adopted a reform path focused on
restructuring of the banks with the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act
the cornerstone. The capital adequacy rules closely
followed the Basel Committee which sets these for the
global banking sector. The US regulators have been
pushing the folk at Basel to create a common floor or
level of capital a bank cannot go below. Under the US
proposals, the floor will apply irrespective of its internal
risk calculations, reducing banks and national regulators
ability to game the system, while still claiming the banks
remain well-capitalised. Beyond that, the US regulatory
reforms primarily aim to strengthen the enforcement arm
of banking supervision. Enforcement actions have been
flying since the recovery set in, in 2010.
Meanwhile, the EU has gone about the business of
rebuilding its financial markets in a traditional, European,
way. Any reform momentum became an excuse to create
more bureaucratese and to engineer ever more Byzantine,

technocratic schemes in the hope that somehow the

uncertainties created by the skewed business models of
banks get entangled in a web of paperwork, making the
crises if not impossible at least impenetrable to the
ordinary punters. Over the last eight years, Europe created
a truly shocking patchwork of various unions, directives,
authorities and boards all designed to make the already
heavily centralised system of banking regulation even
more complex.
The alphabet soup of European reforms includes:
the EBU and the CMU (the European Banking and
Capital Markets Unions, respectively);
the SSM (the Single Supervisory Mechanism) and the
SRM (the Single Resolution Mechanism), under a broader
BRRD (Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive) with the
DGS (Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive);
the CRD IV (Remuneration and prudential requirements)
and the CRR (Single Rule Book);
the MIFID/R and the MAD/R (enhanced frameworks for
securities markets and to prevent market abuse);
the ESRB (the European Systemic Risk Board);
the SEPA (the Single Euro Payments Area); the ESA
(the European Supervisory Authorities) that includes the
EBA (the European Banking Authority);
the MCD (the Mortgage Credit Directive) within a Single
European Mortgage Market; the former is also known
officially as CARRP and includes introduction of something
known as the ESIS;
the Regulation of Financial Benchmarks (such as LIBOR
& EURIBOR) under the umbrella of the ESMA (the

European Securities and Markets Authority), and more.

The sheer absurdity of the European regulatory epicycles
is daunting.
Eight years of solemn promises to end the egregious
abuses of risk management, business practices and
customer trust in the American and European banking
should have produced at least some results when it comes
to cutting the flow of banking scandals and mini-crises.
Alas, as recent events illustrate, nothing could be further
from the truth.
Americas Rotten Apples
In the Land of Freedom [from individual responsibility],
American bankers are wreaking havoc on customers and
investors. The latest instalment in the saga is the largest
retail bank in North America, Wells Fargo.
Last month, the US Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau (CFPB) announced a $185m settlement with the
bank. It turns out the customer-focused Wells Fargo
created over two million fake accounts without customers
knowledge or permission, generating millions of dollars in
fraudulent fees.
But Wells Fargo is not alone.
In July 2015, Citibank settled with CFPB over charges that
it deceptively mis-sold credit products to 2.2 million of its
own customers. The settlement was many times greater
than that of Wells Fargo, at $700m. And in May 2015,
Citicorp, the parent company that controls Citibank,
pleaded guilty to a felony manipulation of foreign currency
markets a charge brought against it by the Justice
Department. Citicorp was joined in the plea by another US

banking behemoth, JPMorgan Chase. You heard it right:

two of the largest US banks are felons.
And there is a third one about to join them.
This month news broke that Morgan Stanley was charged
with dishonest and unethical conduct in its dealings in
Massachusetts securities for urging brokers to sell loans
to their clients.
A snapshot of the larger cases involving Citi and its parent
company shows they have faced fines and settlement
costs of over $19bn between 2002 and 2015. Today, the
CFPB has over 29,000 consumer complaints against Citi
and 37,000 complaints against JP Morgan Chase
outstanding.
Citi was the largest recipient of the US Fed bailout
package that followed the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. It
obtained heavily subsidised loans totalling $2.7tr or
roughly 16 percent of the entire bailout in the US.
But there have been no prosecutions of Citi, JP Morgan
Chase or Wells Fargo executives.
Europes Ailing Dinosaurs
This state protection is matched in the case of another
serial abuser of market rules: Deutsche Bank.
According to US Government Accountability Office (GAO)
data, during the 2008-2010 crisis Deutsche got $354bn of
emergency financial assistance from the US authorities. In
contrast, Lehman Brothers got only $183bn.
Last month, Deutsche entered into talks with the US
Department of Justice over the settlement for mis-selling
mortgage-backed securities. The original fine was set at
$14bn enough to effectively wipe out the capital

reserves cushion in Europes largest bank. Latest

financial-market rumours are putting the final settlement
closer to $5.4-6bn, still close to one third of the banks
equity value. To put these figures into perspective,
Europes Single Resolution Board fund, designed to be the
last line of defence against taxpayers bailouts, currently
holds only $11bn in reserves.
The Department of Justice demand blew Deutsches
troubled operations wide open. The business model of the
bank resembled a house of cards. Deutsches problems
are threefold: legal, capital, and leverage risks.
The bank has already paid out some $9bn worth of fines
and settlements between 2008 and 2015. At the start of
this year, the bank was yet to achieve resolution of the
probe into currency markets manipulation with the
Department of Justice. Deutsche (along with 16 other
financial institutions) is also defending a massive law suit
by pension funds and other investors. There are ongoing
probes in the US and the UK concerning its role in
channelling some $10bn of potentially illegal Russian
money into the West. The Department of Justice is also
after the bank for alleged malfeasance in trading in the US
Treasury market.
And in April 2016 the German TBTF (Too-Big- To-Fail)
goliath settled a series of US lawsuits over allegations it
manipulated gold and silver prices. The settlement amount
was not disclosed, but the manipulations involved tens of
billions of dollars.
Two years ago, Deutsche was placed on the enhanced

supervision list by the UK regulators a list, reserved for

banks that have either gone through a systemic failure or
are at a risk of such. This list includes no other large
banking institution, save for Deutsche. As reported by
Reuters, citing the Financial Times, in May this year, UKs
financial regulatory authority stated, as recently as this
year, that Deutsche Bank has serious and systemic
failings in its controls against money laundering, terrorist
financing and sanctions.
As if this was not enough, last month, a group of senior
Deutsche ex-employees was charged in Milan for
colluding to falsify the accounts of Italys third-biggest
bank, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA (BMPS). Of
course, BMPS itself needs a government bailout, as it has
been haemorrhageing capital over recent years while
nursing a mountain of bad loans. One of the worlds oldest
banks, the Italian lender, which has been deemed
systemically important has been teetering on the verge of
insolvency since 2008-2009.
All in, at the end of August 2016, Deutsche Bank is
dealing with some 7,000 law suits, according to the
Financial Times.
Beyond its legal problems, Deutsche is sitting on a capital
structure that includes billions of notorious CoCos
Contingent Convertible Capital Instruments. These are a
hybrid form of capital instruments, favoured by European
and Irish pillar banks, that are structured to absorb losses
in times of stress, by automatically converting themselves
into equity. They appease European regulators and, in
theory, provide a cushion of protection for depositors. In

reality, CoCos hide complex risks and can destabilise

those who deal in them.
Moreover, Deutsches balance sheet is loaded with trillions
of Euro worth of opaque and hardto- value derivatives. At
of the end of 2015, the bank held an estimated 1.4tr
exposure to these instruments in official accounts. A full
third of the banks assets is composed of derivatives and
other exposures, with otherserving as a financial
euphemism for anything other than blue-chip, safe,
investments.
The Financial Undead
Eight years after the blow-up of the global financial system
hundreds of tomes of reform legislation and rule books
have been thrown at the crumbling faade of the global
banking system. Tens of trillions of dollars in liquidity and
lending supports have been pumped into the banks and
financial markets. And there are never-ending calls from
the Left and the Right for Government solutions to banking
problems.
Still, the American and European banking models show
little real change after the crisis. Both the discipline of the
banks boards and the banks strategies for rebuilding their
profits remain unaltered by the lessons of the crisis.
Election after election candidates compete against each
other to promise a regulatory nirvana of de-risked banking.
And time after time, as the electoral smoke dissipates, the
grossrisk- neglecting system subsists, disregarding
customers on the implicit assumption that, if things get hot
again, taxpayers cash will rain on the fires threatening the

too-big-to-reform banking giants.

The May 2016 Programme for Government commits the
Government to develop the process of budget- and policyproofing as a means of advancing equality, reducing
poverty and strengthening economic and social rights. In
doing so, it specifically recognises the Irish Human Rights
and Equality Commission (IHREC) as an independent
expert body to support the development of this proofing.
The commitment focuses on equality and human-rights
budgeting including by developing institutions to support
proofing processes in key Government Departments and
strengthening the budget-scrutiny role of the Oireachtas.
There is a separate commitment for the Department of
Public Expenditure and Reform to advance the role of
social impact assessment.
Ireland was once a leader in policy-proofing. The 1997
National Anti-Poverty Strategy Sharing in Progress
pioneered Poverty Proofing to assess all major policies
and programmes at design and review stages to ensure
that they either contribute to reducing poverty or, at least,
do not increase poverty. It was applied to major economic
and social proposals and was embedded in the Strategic
Management Initiative for the public sector.
A National Economic and Social Council evaluation in
2001 found a high level of formal compliance with povertyproofing. However, there was confusion as to whether the
objective was tone-setting or practical. Over time there
was a shift from overall poverty-proofing to specific
poverty-impact assessment in the Office for Social
Inclusion. The non-statutory exercise became a tick box

exercise, and there was a gradual rundown of the

supporting institutions including the Office of Social
Inclusion.
Elsewhere, the Gender Equality Unit in the Department of
Justice, Equality and Law Reform developed, promoted
and supported Gender Impact Assessment Guidelines for
the National Development Plan 2000- 2008. This had
been mandated by the EU for disbursement of its
Structural Funds.
Progress was found to have been made on mainstreaming
gender under the headings dealt with by the National
Development Plan. However, progress uneven. The
process ended with the closure of the Gender Equality
Unit.
An Equality Proofing Working Group was established in
the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. It
was an initiative of the Equality Authority which funded it
2000-2008. It instigated a number of pilot projects,
promotional events, proofing tools, and data analyses to
support policy-making to take account of the situation,
experience and specific needs of groups experiencing
inequality and covered by the grounds in equality
legislation. This initiative collapsed with the diminution of
the Equality Authority over the 2009-2010 period.
It is difficult to isolate specific outcomes generated through
these processes. However, progress includes: process
innovations including in information provision, datagathering and analysis; greater transparency; greater
accountability; and culture change within public
institutions. Improvements were also made in various

policy areas.
The procedural and substantive progress smoothed the
path for new commitments to human-rights and equalityproofing, including equality and human-rights budgeting.
The commitment to human-rights and equality coincides
with changes to, and pressure for reform of, the budget
process. An OECD report, Review of Budget oversight by
Parliament: Ireland in 2015 recommended a range of
reforms aimed at improving the quality of policy-making,
resource-allocation and accountability, and ultimately at
promoting better outcomes for citizens.
These reforms included greater ex-ante engagement of
the Oireachtas in fiscal planning through commitments by
Government to provide more information to the Oireachtas
and the establishment of a Parliamentary Budget Office to
analyse information about taxation, expenditure and
performance, and to cost policies.
There have been a number of important new
developments in the budgetary process this year. These
include publication of the Spring/Summer economic
statement (SES) and parliamentary engagement in the
National Economic Dialogue (NED), which the budget
scrutiny committee attended, in June. In July the Tax
Strategy Group papers were published and forwarded to
parliamentary committees. The Budget White Paper will
continue to be published on the Friday before Budget Day.
Documents available on Budget Day will now include
distributional analyses. SWITCH analysis will be available
before the Social Welfare and Finance Bills. The
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will have

regard to equality and human-rights-proofing as part of its

social impact assessment framework. There will be a new
ex-ante focus on the Stability Programme Update with
more parliamentary comment encouraged, and there will
be greater parliamentary engagement with mid-year
expenditure reports.
At the end of June 2016 the Report of the Select
Committee on Arrangements for Budgetary Scrutiny set
out proposals, on foot of the Programme for Government,
for a new budget scrutiny framework. This should include:
a Budget Oversight Committee which has since been
established; enhanced budget scrutiny by existing
Oireachtas sectoral Committees that should involve
engagement with civil society; and the early establishment
of the Independent Parliamentary Budget Office on a
non-statutory basis in the first instance and on a statutory
basis within two years.
This Report also states that Government proposals for
budget changes and policy changes should be policyproofed with specific reference to gender, age, disability,
poverty and regional impact, and should be subjected to a
distributional impact assessment. It recommends that the
Independent Parliamentary Budget Office should liaise
closely with IHREC, taking opportunities for exchange of
information and learning about their respective agendas.

Proofing: high standards demanded

As to Budget 2017 on 11 October, the Select Committee

recommended that, to advance the proofing
arrangements, the Department of Finance and the
Department of Public Expenditure and Reform should be
requested to provide an early briefing on the development
and implementation of the Governments proofing of the
budget-making process to the Committee on Budgetary
Oversight. However, it would be better if individual
Ministers could also be asked to engage with their
counterpart committees in the early autumn over progress
made in the proofing of any specific proposed policies.
All this represents substantial progress on the
Governments commitment to enhanced engagement with
the Oireachtas throughout the budget cycle. However, it is
clear that the 2017 staging posts are constrained by
Constitutional provisions and by executive prerogatives.
Therefore, it is expected that much of the meaningful
parliamentary engagement with the budget will focus on
the legislative stages between the budget and the
introduction of the Finance and Social Welfare Bills.

The commitment to human-rights- and equality-proofing,

including equality- and human-rights-budgeting, derives
from the UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural
Rights which in June 2015 encouraged the Irish
government to better deploy rights-based budgetary
governance processes. The Committee recommended:
phasing out austerity measures and ensuring that
progress is made in the effective protection of economic,
social and cultural rights in the post-crisis recovery;
reviewing the Irish tax regime, with a view to increasing
revenues to restore pre-crisis levels of public services and
social benefits; and using human-rights impact
assessments in policy-making.
The IHREC is committed to using its enabling and
compliance powers to bring these recommendations into
effect. The IHRECs 2016-18 Strategic Plan stresses five
goals, one of which focuses on building support for and
advancing socio-economic rights and actions to deliver
human-rights- and equality-proofing of key legislation and
budgetary processes. The IHREC has briefed the Select
Committee and civil society on developments and
possibilities.
Ireland has had little experience of human-rights or
equality budgeting. It is a complex and demanding field.
Gender budgeting has been described by Elson as a
process of merging two sets of knowledge, that of gender
equality and that of public-sector budgeting/financing.
Quinn describes it as the integration of gender as
category of analysis into budget process. Gender
budgeting is required in about 60 states, often as an IMF

condition. An IMF study to be launched later this year will

describe various models and experiences of genderproofing and offer valuable lessons to advance gender
budgeting.
There are different traditions of proofing. Some humanrights approaches focus on principles. Equality or gendermainstreaming approaches focus on the process of
implementing budgets. Poverty-proofing and poverty
impact assessment approaches often focus on assessing
distributional outcomes for different groups. Human-rightsand equality-proofing, including equality and human rights
budgeting, needs to draw from and integrate these
traditions.
Irish people can invoke the new public sector duty
imposed by section 42 of the Irish Human Rights and
Equality Commission Act 2014. This requires public
bodies to have regard to equality and human rights in the
performance of their functions. The IHREC has also
sought to implement lessons from international
experience.
The Centre for Economic and Social Rights, for example,
has developed OPERA, a four-dimensional monitoring
framework for economic, social, and cultural rights.
OPERA promotes a focus on: measurable outcomes in
enjoyment of these rights; the policy efforts in processes
and substance to secure such outcomes; the resources
allocated to enforcement of these rights; and state
compliance with international covenants.
Budgets should advance key human-rights rubrics such
as: progressive realisation of rights; non-retrogression in

the enjoyment of rights; maximisation of available

resources for the enjoyment of rights; and immediacy of
obligations for rights implementation. Given Irelands poor
record in revenue generation and bottom-of-league-table
trend in public spending, as a percentage of GDP,
inevitably a key indicator of commitment, the focus on
evaluating efforts to maximise the resources available to
facilitate enjoyment of rights appears particularly useful.
Lessons from elsewhere suggest that institutional reform
to develop proofing capacity does not happen overnight.
The pace needs to be realistic and incremental. For
Ireland, this should focus on working to establish, in the
medium term, a well-resourced and fully functioning
independent parliamentary budget office that can hold
government and departments to account.
In Budget 2017, short-term progress can be made with the
following steps
Establish a national proofing committee to advance the
institutional framework for human rights and equality
proofing, chaired by the Chair of the Budget Oversight
Committee and with the IHREC, ESRI , Irish Fiscal
Advisory Council, and independent experts as members.
Ensure all Departments, as part of their Section 42
public sector duty to have regard to equality and human
rights, establish human rights and equality statements that
set goals and establish issues, and link budget
expenditure to advancing these goals.
The Ministers for Finance and Public Expenditure and
Reform should include a human rights and equality
statement in their respective budget statements.

 Specific government departments, with support from the

IHREC, should, during 2017, participate in demonstration
models of proofing to pilot different approaches.

National Asset Management Agencys

sale of Project Eagle

https://static.rasset.ie/documents/news/special-report-94-nationalasset-management-agencys-sale-of-project-eagle-summary.pdf

Special Report 94 - National Asset

Management Agency's sale ...
National Asset Management Agency's sale of Project
Eagle. ... The report also examines the Project Eagle loan
sale process and NAMA
http://audgen.gov.ie/documents/specialreports/projecteagle/Special_Report_94__National_Asset_Management_Agencys_sale_of_Project_Eagle.pdf

Nama's Project Eagle sale had

unusual features, says
property expert

The 1.2 billion sale of Northern Ireland

property loans by the Republic's toxic assets
agency Nama was marked by unusual
features, a property expert hired to advise on
the deal has said.
Patrick Long, a managing director at
international financial advisors Lazard, led an
outside team asked by Nama to manage the
sale of its so-called Project Eagle portfolio,
which was bought by US investors Cerberus
in April 2014.
Before a parliamentary committee in Dublin
probing the controversial transaction, Mr
Long said: "There were quite a lot of unusual
features."
The property sale expert pointed out the fact
there was only one round of bidding and few
bidders involved for what was the largest

property deal in Northern Ireland's history.

Mr Long also told the Public Accounts
Committee that one of the first things Nama
told Lazard was for the need to keep the sale
"confidential".
"That was one of the first things that they
told us," he said. "They viewed this
transaction as politically sensitive."
The Project Eagle sale has been mired in
controversy for more than a year after
allegations were made about so-called
success or fixer fees.
Another US company, Pimco, has said it
pulled out of an earlier bid weeks before the
deal was closed because it was asked for a
fixer payment of 16 million for three parties
behind the scenes.
The money was to be shared equally by
Belfast businessman Frank Cushnahan, US
law firm Brown Rudnick and Ian Coulter, a
managing partner of Belfast solicitors firm
Tughans, Pimco previously told the
committee.
Mr Cushnahan was formerly a Nama adviser
on Northern Ireland, on the recommendation
of the DUP.
Brown Rudnick and Tughans also advised
Cerberus on the successful deal.
All parties have denied any wrongdoing.
Mr Long said he didn't really know what
information the winning bidder Cerberus got
from Brown Rudnick and Tughans.
"I could not really say whether it was

conferring unfair advantage on them or not,"

he added.
Mr Long said success fees are commonplace
in large property deals and Lazard was also
working for Nama on a no deal, no pay basis.
"Our fee was only payable on success... this
is standard market practice, it is not
something I'm embarrassed about," he told
the hearing.
Mr Long stood over the sale process, saying it
was "appropriate, given Nama's objective"
and had "achieved the highest price for the
portfolio available in the market at the time".
"We were motivated to achieve the highest
price possible, that is how success fees
work," he added.
"I have seen no evidence that suggests a
different process would have achieved a
higher price."
The Republic's spending watchdog has said
Nama lost taxpayers up to 190 million on
the Project Eagle sale.
The Comptroller and Auditor General said the
agency undervalued loans associated with
the 800 properties in the portfolio.

Nama: Sacking adviser Frank

Cushnahan 'would have stoked
political tensions'

SACKING prominent Belfast businessman

Frank Cushnahan from his role as a Nama
adviser would have stoked political tensions
in the north, the agency's chairman has said.
Nama's Frank Daly was asked before a
parliamentary committee investigating its
controversial sale of the 1.24 billion Project
Eagle portfolio if that meant Mr Cushnahan
was protected.
"No, it doesn't mean he was protected," he
told the Dil's Public Accounts Committee.
"We would have needed something very solid
to remove Mr Cushnahan from (Nama's)
Northern Ireland Advisory Committee
because there is no doubt at all it would have
caused tension up north."
However, Mr Daly said if Nama knew about
Mr Cushnahan's alleged involvement in the
Project Eagle sale while he was still a Nama
adviser then he would been removed -

"political sensitivities or not".

He added: "But up until the time he resigned
in 2013 we knew absolutely nothing about
those activities of his, or alleged activities."
The Project Eagle portfolio of Northern Ireland
property loans was bought by US investors
Cerberus in April 2014.
Another US company Pimco, a leading bidder,
has said it pulled out weeks earlier because it
was asked for a fixer payment of 16 million
for three parties behind the scenes.
The money was to be shared equally by Mr
Cushnahan, US law firm Brown Rudnick and
Ian Coulter, a managing partner of Belfast
solicitors Tughans, Pimco has said.
All parties have denied any wrongdoing.
Ronnie Hanna, Nama's former head of asset
recovery, has turned down an invitation to
appear before the hearings.
Mr Hanna, a former senior executive at the
Ulster Bank, said he was declining the invite
because of an ongoing investigation into
Project Eagle by the UK's National Crime
Agency and the PSNI.
He added that he still has not been released
from a duty of confidentiality to Nama.

Stormont Finance Minister Mairtin O Muilleoir

has said Northern Ireland's entire political
system has been corrupted by the
controversial 1.2 billion Project Eagle
property sale.
Mr O Muilleoir further alleged that the north's
business world, as well as its legal and
accounting professions, has been left tainted
by the deal between Nama and US vulture
fund Cerberus.
The "race to the bottom" that Cerberus
brought to Ireland when it secured the
property loan portfolio in 2014 is "absolutely
shameful", he told a parliamentary
committee in Dublin.
Mr O Muilleoir was being questioned about
recent reports that Cerberus paid almost no
tax on huge multimillion-pound profits reaped
by its acquisition of the so-called Project
Eagle portfolio.

A number of investigations are ongoing into

the sale of the Northern Ireland property
loans by the Republic's "bad bank" Nama, set
up to clean up the mess left in Irish banking
by the 2008 property crash.
"I think it has been a shame on this land what
Cerberus has done - it is absolutely
shameful," Mr O Muilleoir told Dublin's
Oireachtas Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation
committee.
"Ordinary people's businesses destroyed,
then picking their winners and chosen few.
"Then, worse than that, corrupting the entire
political, business, legal, accountancy
profession north of the border, for sure, by
their practices."
Mr O Muilleoir said reports Cerberus were
able to use an entirely legal loophole - which
has since been shut - to pay very little tax on
its substantial profits did not surprise him for
a minute.
"The only thing that surprises me is that they
paid any taxes - even a thousand euro - that
they paid any tax at all," he said.
"Because that is the values of the race to the
bottom they have brought to the business
world here."
Independent TD Stephen Donnelly, told the
committee that accounts filed in recent days
showed Cerberus, whose chairman is former
US vice president Dan Quayle, made a
taxable profit of 168 million on its Project
Eagle property portfolio.

However, it was obliged to pay just 1,596

tax on the profits, an effective tax rate of
0.001%, Mr Donnelly said.
The TD said if the completely legal tax
loophole had continued, the Irish exchequer
would have lost up to 20 billion euro from
vulture funds who have bought up 40 billion
euro worth of Irish commercial property
assets in recent years.
The Project Eagle portfolio was bought by
Cerberus in April 2014.
Another US company Pimco, a leading bidder
in the sale, has said it pulled out weeks
earlier because it was asked for a fixer
payment of 16 million for three parties
behind the scenes.
The money was to be shared equally by
Belfast businessman Frank Cushnahan, US
law firm Brown Rudnick and Ian Coulter, a
managing partner of Belfast solicitors
Tughans, Pimco previously told a
parliamentary committee.
Mr Cushnahan was formerly a Nama adviser
on Northern Ireland, on the recommendation
of the DUP.
All parties have denied any wrongdoing.
Britain's National Crime Agency, the US
Department of Justice and its Securities and
Exchange Commission, as well as
parliamentary committees in Dublin and
Belfast are all investigating the Project Eagle
sale.

Nama: Arlene Foster urged to

intervene after Peter Robinson

'flatly contradicts' Martin
McGuinness

ARLENE Foster faced calls yesterday to clarify

Stormont's role in the northern Nama deal
after Peter Robinson wrote to a Dil
committee "flatly contradicting" Martin
McGuinness.
In a letter, Mr Robinson refused to appear
before the Dail's Public Accounts Committee
to give evidence on the 1.24 billion Project
Eagle portfolio.
The former first minister said he was not
answerable to the inquiry and that he had
already given evidence to a separate probe
at Stormont.
But ex-DUP leader Mr Robinson said the
committee could email him if it wants his
views on any specific issues and he would be
happy to respond.

Committee chairman Sen Fleming said

much of Mr Robinson's assembly finance
committee statement "flatly contradicts"
evidence given by Deputy First Minister
Martin McGuinness to the Dublin hearing last
week.
The inquiry would have to adjudicate on that,
he said.
Independent TD Catherine Connolly said she
was disappointed that Mr Robinson was
refusing to attend.
"I believe it would have been very helpful if
Mr Robinson attended," she said.
"We are now placed in a very difficult
situation. He has flatly contradicted what the
deputy first minister said here."
A criminal investigation and parliamentary
probes on both sides of the border were
launched last year following claims about the
controversial sale of Nama's Northern Ireland
property loans portfolio.
It was alleged in the Dil that a 7m offshore
fund linked to the 2015 deal was earmarked
for a northern politician or party.
Sinn Fin's Mr McGuinness has previously
claimed he was "kept in the dark" about
meetings and correspondence DUP ministers
had with Nama and loan book bidders a
stance rejected by Mr Robinson.
SDLP leader Colum Eastwood last night urged
First Minister Mrs Foster to put pressure on
her predecessor to attend the committee.
The Foyle MLA added that the first and

deputy first ministers' office must be asked

whether Mr McGuinness or Mr Robinson's
version of events is correct.
"As his party leader and as the leader of an
executive cast into disrepute by this scandal,
Arlene Foster must pressure Peter Robinson
to give evidence to the public accounts
committee in Dublin," he said.
"Up to now she has shown only indifference
and equivocation on this critical issue. If she
does not, and this contradiction is not
resolved, then the Executive Office must be
asked which version of events is correct."

NAMA CEO Brendan McDonagh rejected the stance taken

by the C&AG Seamus McCarthy
NAMA chiefs reject C&AG's claims over NI portfolio sale

NAMAs chief executive and chairman have

both emphatically rejected the finding of the

Comptroller and Auditor General that the sale

of NAMA's Northern Irish loans resulted in a
probable loss of 190m.
NAMA CEO Brendan McDonagh and Chairman
Frank Daly were speaking at the Public
Accounts Committee, which met to discuss
the Project Eagle sale.
Project Eagle is the name given to the
Northern Ireland property-loans portfolio that
NAMA controversially sold in April 2014 to
Cerberus, a US company, for about 1.3bn.
Mr McDonagh said he emphatically rejected
the Comptroller's remarks that the decision
to sell the loans at a minimum price of
1.3bn involved a significant probable loss of
value to the State.
Mr McDonagh said the Comptroller's view
that a discount rate of 5.5% was the
appropriate one to derive the market value
and was not supported by market or expert
support.
He also said it ignored strong market
evidence from loans sales evidence that used
a discount rate of 10-15%.
Mr Daly said the agency stood over the
decision to continue the Project Eagle sale
when they found out about Frank
Cushnahan's proposed fixers fee with bidder
Pimco.

He said the interest of Irish taxpayers took

precedence over Mr Cushnahan's "alleged
maneuverings" in Belfast.
He said it was not an easy decision to make
as Mr Cushnahan had been strongly endorsed
by the Northern Ireland government and
appeared to have been a respected figure in
the Northern Ireland business community.
Mr Daly said they were satisfied they
managed Mr Cushnahan's conflicts of interest
appropriately. He said Mr Cushnahan was a
not a NAMA insider and he was peripheral as
far as it was concerned.
Sinn Fin's Mary Lou McDonald asked Mr Daly
when he was made aware of a success fees
arrangement with Mr Cushnahan.
Mr Daly said NAMA had first been told of the
fee arrangement on 10 March 2014. He said
they had two or three calls from Pimco.
He said NAMA did not know when the fee
arrangement was made and he said Mr
Cushnahan has denied any arrangement.

Mr Daly also said Mr Cushnahan had been

gone from NAMA's Northern Ireland advisory
committee.
Under questioning from PAC chairman Sean
Fleming about why NAMA did not carry out
valuations, Mr Daly said it adopted a bespoke
process for Project Eagle, given the
sensitivity involved in Northern Ireland.
"We accepted certain features of the normal
sales process would not apply including the
commissioning of property valuations and
that was related to sensitivities in the
Northern Ireland market," he said.
Ms McDonald said she was struck by the
"trenchant nature" of NAMA's criticism,
adding that it fell short only slightly of
accusing the C&AG of incompetence and
malice.
She told Mr Daly that he was quick to criticise
the report of the C&AG, given that he said he
did not take the decision lightly and asked if
he a difficulty with oversight.
Mr Daly responded that he had been dealing
with the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor
General for decades without issue.
He told Ms McDonald that his criticism was "a
professional difference" and he was not
saying there was incompetence or malice.
Ms McDonald pressed Mr Daly on his
assertion that NAMA had got Pimco to
withdraw, saying that documents showed
Pimco's willingness to leave after the issue of

a potential success fee was revealed.

However, Mr Daly said Pimco withdrew
because "they knew we would not let them
continue".
Earlier, Comptroller and Auditor General
Seamus McCarthy had defended his report on
the sale by the National Asset Management
Agency of its Northern Irish loans.
The C&AG recently found that the sale
involved a significant probable loss to the
State of up to 190 million.
The Comptroller and Auditor General is
standing by his report and today raised lots
of issues about the deal.
He said the National Asset Management
Agency had not conducted any additional
valuations before the sale.
He again took issue with the discount applied
and said a lower one had previously been
presented to the NAMA board.
Mr McCarthy said that the difference between
the role of the sale advisers in this deal
compared to others by NAMA "was
enormous".
But he added that the probable loss was not
set in stone, saying he did not have a crystal
ball and does not know if a better price could
have been achieved.

The report by the State's financial

watchdog into the sale of NAMA's Northern
Ireland portfolio has found the
agency incurred a potential loss to the
taxpayer of 190m on the sale after previous
write downs were included.
The Comptroller and Auditor General's
report raises questions with how the loan
portfolio was valued and marketed for sale.
NAMA has said the key finding of the report
is "fundamentally unsound and unstable
and cannot be left unchallenged".
Irish banks had lent out 4.6bn to developers
in Northern Ireland and these loans were
bought by NAMA for 1.9bn, before
being eventually sold for 1.3bn.
The C&AG says if the loans were held and
worked out individually, they could have
been worth 1.49bn.

It says there was a potential loss to the

taxpayer of 190m.
This is on top of a write down in the value of
the Northern Ireland loans that had occurred
between 2010 and 2013 as a result of annual
revaluations of the portfolio.
The C&AG said there is no indication that
NAMA had considered a bulk sale of its
Northern Ireland assets until US law firm
Brown Rudnick wrote on behalf of US
investment fund Pimco in June 2013 offering
an exclusive deal.
It found that two of NAMA's valuations of its
Northern Ireland loans in late 2013 and early
2014 underestimated their value.
The C&AG report also noted that Pimco
withdrew from the bidding war in March 2014
after it told NAMA about a "proposed success
fee arrangement" involving Brown Rudnick, a
Belfast law firm called Tughans, and a former
member of NAMA's Northern Ireland Advisory
Committee.
The 7m subsequently discovered in the Isle
of Man was in an account controlled by a
former managing partner of Tughans, Ian
Coulter, who resigned after it was unearthed.
Tughans, which acted as a subcontractor for
Cerberus's US lawyers, Brown Rudnick,
insisted it was not aware of the transfer and
all parties involved in the 2014 transaction
have denied wrongdoing.
The C&AG found NAMA dropped its reserve
price in late March 2014 to 1.23bn and on 1

April that year Cerberus offered 1.24bn and

the only other bidder, Fortress, offered
1.075bn.
NAMA chairman Frank Daly has written
to Minister for Finance Michael
Noonan outlining his objections to the report.
The Cabinet this morning agreed that there
needs to be further investigation of the
sale.
Taoiseach Enda Kenny is to invite Opposition
party leaders to meet him tomorrow to seek
agreement on the issues that need further
investigation.
The meeting between Mr Kenny and
Opposition leaders will also look at the most
appropriate nature and terms of reference for
such an investigation.
Subject to the outcome of those discussions,
the matter will then be the subject of a Dil
debate early in the new session.
The Government also expects that the Public
Accounts Committee will wish to convene a
public hearing at an early date.
There have been calls from the Opposition to
set up a commission of investigation into the
1.6bn transaction.
Mr Kenny has pointed to legal issues
concerning the ability to compel witnesses
and documents as two jurisdictions are
involved.
National Asset Management Agencys sale of
Project Eagle

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/sp
ecialreports/projecteagle/Special_Report_94__National_Asset_Management_Agencys_s
ale_of_Project_Eagle.pdf
Mr McCarthy also took issue with NAMA for
not writing to a former member of NAMA's
Northern Ireland Advisory Committee, Frank
Cushnahan, about an alleged fee-sharing
arrangement with a bidder.
But he said his report draws no conclusions
about individuals.
Mr McCarthy defended his investigation
team, saying they all had significant audit
and evaluation experience.
His report, he said, had been reviewed by
members of the National Audit Office in
London.
NAMA previously described the C&AG's key
finding as "fundamentally unsound and
unstable and it states it cannot be left
unchallenged".
NAMA also believes the Comptroller and
Auditor General should have engaged
specialist external advice.
PAC chairman Sen Fleming has said the
hearings will try to determine the "actual
loss" to the taxpayer.
Speaking on RT's Morning Ireland, he said
the PAC aims to produce a report by
Christmas.
Mr Fleming also said the PAC will look at the

sales process from beginning to end and will

ask the C&AG why his audit of NAMA was
only presented this year despite being
carried out in 2014 and 2015.
No intention of suspending NAMA sales Noonan
Elsewhere, Minister for Finance Michael
Noonan has said he has no intention of
suspending NAMA's sales activities.
During Minister's Questions in the Dil, Sinn
Fin's Pearse Doherty asked that all NAMA
sales be suspended in light of what the C&AG
report said.
In response, Mr Noonan said: "In no way has
the integrity of NAMA or the NAMA board or
the integrity of its decisions been brought
into question.
"So I have no intention of directing NAMA to
halt its sales activities.
"To do so would irreparably damage NAMA's
position, its positive contribution to our
recovery and damage our reputation as a
credible, open and transparent market. By
extension any such interference would be
detrimental to the interests of Irish
taxpayers."
Asked by Fianna Fil's Michael McGrath about
the value of NAMA's remaining loan assets,
Minister Noonan said that the par value of
NAMA's outstanding loans was 39.6bn as of
the end of March.
He said the NAMA disposal strategy is
designed to take full advantage of strong

purchaser interest in loans.

NAMA Project Eagle - NI Loan Book

Briefing NoteProject Eagle Briefing Pack
Dated- 11 July 2015
http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/fil
es/25.%20NAMA%20Project%20Eagle
%20-%20NI%20Loan%20Book
%20Briefing%20Note%20%28att%29.pdf
NAMA Briefing Note and Minister
Speaking Points This statement is issued
by NAMA in response to a number of
press queries received in relation to the
sale in 2014 of the loans of Northern
Ireland debtors (Project Eagle).
http://www.finance.gov.ie/sites/default/fil
es/12.%202015-07-03%20NAMA
%20Briefing%20Note%20and
%20Minister%20Speaking%20Points
%20%28v2%29%20%282%29%20aor
%20%284%29.pdf

Nama man Ronnie Hanna met

Cerberus chief hours before
Project Eagle bid deadline

18 April, 2016

SENIOR Nama officials met the head of

Cerberus the day before the US fund bid to
buy 4.5bn worth of Northern Ireland-based
loans, it has been revealed.
Ronnie Hanna, Nama's head of asset
recovery at the time, met with Cerberus
chairman John Snow for a one-hour meeting
on March 31, 2014.
Just three days later, Cerberus had a bid of
1.2bn to buy the loans accepted.
The portfolio - named Project Eagle - formed
the vast majority of loans in the north held by
Nama, the Republic's so-called bad bank.
According to Mr Hanna's diary, the meeting
with Mr Snow took place a day before the
deadline to bid for the loans.
It was released following a Freedom of
Information request by the Sunday Times in
Dublin.
Nama described the meeting as a "courtesy
visit" and said was allowed to go ahead on

the basis that Project Eagle was not

discussed.
Nama chairman Frank Daly and chief
executive Brendan McDonagh also attended
the meeting.
Cerberus was one of three firms involved in
the bidding process.
Last month, it emerged Mr Hanna, and
Gareth Robinson, son of former first minister
Peter Robinson, were sent letters inviting
them to attend Stormont's finance committee
probe into the Project Eagle deal.
It followed the naming of Mr Hanna in secret
footage for a BBC Spotlight programme as
someone who "prevented people's lights
going out".
The comment was made by Mr Cushnahan,
who was also filmed saying he was due a
secret 'fixer's fee' from the Project Eagle sale.
Speaking about "Ronnie", Mr Cushnahan told
a developer whose loans were in Nama, that
"People's lights would have gone out except
for him. I mean that sincerely."
Mr Hanna, who left Nama in late 2014 now
runs a consultancy business in the north.

http://www.irishnews.com/news/2016/04/
18/news/nama-man-ronnie-hanna-metcerberus-chief-hours-before-projecteagle-bid-deadline-489521/

Frank Daly insisted that NAMA had run its business to the
highest professional and commercial standards

This is the actual article body

NAMA has defended its handling of the sale

of its Northern Ireland portfolio of properties,
Project Eagle, and rejected the conclusions of
the report on the matter by the Comptroller
and Auditor General.
During a ten-hour hearing, the Chief
Executive and Chair of the agency stood over
their handling of the sale and insisted they
got the best deal for the taxpayer.
Earlier, the agency's CEO Brendan McDonagh
said that the C&AG's finding that NAMA set
the reserve price for Project Eagle too low
was "not plausible".
He also said the report's findings of a
probable loss of 190m "rests entirely on the
view that NAMA applied, or should have
applied, a standard discount of 5.5% to all
evaluations."
Mr McDonagh said that in Comptroller and

Auditor General Seamus McCarthy's previous

evidence to the committee he said it was not
possible to be definite about the "probable
loss".
He pointed out that Mr McCarthy said there
was a margin around the 190m figure but it
was not possible to say what the margin
might be.
During today's hearings, Mr McCarthy again
stood over his report, including changing the
wording of the final draft of his report to refer
to a probable loss of 190m on the sale,
rather than a "potential loss".
Independent4Change Deputy Catherine
Connolly asked Mr McCarthy if he would
change any word in his report, to which he
replied "no".
NAMA chairman Frank Daly also defended
their handling of the unsuccessful bidder,
PIMCO.
Mr Daly said that a number of facts were not
disclosed by PIMCO to NAMA, surrounding the
involvement of Frank Cushnahan, a former
member of NAMA's Northern Ireland's
advisory committee.
PIMCO withdrew from the sale after they
became aware of a proposed success fee of
15m to be divided equally between two law
firms, Brown Rudnick and Tughans and Mr
Cushnahan.
He also rejected PIMCOs previous assertion
that NAMA "mischaracterised" PIMCOs role in

the sale.
However, Mr Daly acknowledged that the
agency should have informed Lazard, the
sales advisors, of the circumstances around
PIMCOs withdrawal from the sale process,
but said it would not have affected the sale.
"In retrospect, it would have been better if
Lazard had been aware of the real reason for
PIMCO's exit. But we did not regard it as a
major commercial issue at the time - given
that Lazard considered the post-PIMCO
competitive tension to be sufficient," he said.
Asked for a final comment as the ten hour
meeting wrapped, Mr Daly insisted that no
one in NAMA knew anything about Mr
Cushnahan's involvement with PIMCO, or
Brown Rudnick or Tughans or success fees
until 10 March 2014.
He also added that his respect for the
Comptroller and Auditor General was
"untarnished".
Robinson contradicts 'almost
everything' McGuinness told PAC
Earlier it emerged that former Northern
Ireland first minister Peter Robinson has
written to the Public Accounts Committee
"flatly contradicting almost everything"
Martin McGuinness told it.

Mr Robinson has also declined an invitation to

appear before the Dil committee.
Committee Chair Sen Fleming said Mr
Robinson's letter said he understands the
constitutional reasons we are not answerable
to the Public Accounts Committee and it is
complicated by the fact that there is an
inquiry in Northern Ireland to which he gave
evidence.
Mr Fleming said Mr Robinson went on to point
out that he recognises there is some
similarity between the remit of PAC and the
committee in Northern Ireland.
He also attached a copy of the statement he
made to that committee.
Mr Robinson said that if the PAC wants his
views on any specific committee it can email
him and he will be "happy to provide a
response".
Mr Fleming said that much of Mr
Robinson's statement that he made to the
Northern Ireland committee is flatly
contradicting Deputy First Minister Martin

McGuinness.
He said that the committee will have to
consider those issues.
Sinn Fin's Mary Lou McDonald said that "Mr
Robinson does have the opportunity to come
before the committee to have his evidence
tested. That is the distinction from the
deputy first minister."
Independent TD Catherine Connolly said she
is disappointed by Mr Robinson's decision.
The Galway TD said that she believes it
would have been very helpful if NAMA had
attended the Northern Ireland Committee
and equally it would have been very helpful if
Mr Robinson attended PAC.
"We are now placed in a very difficult position
where he has flatly contradicted what the
Deputy First Minister said here", Ms Connolly
said.
Former NAMA official Ronnie Hanna has
already written to the PAC declining an
invitation to appear before it as "he has a
duty of confidentiality to NAMA that he still
has not been released from" and secondly
"because of the investigation by the NCA
(National Crime Agency) and PSNI".
David Mizzells, Managing Director of Fortress,
has also written to the committee declining
an invitation to come before it. He said his
company is the unsuccessful bidders
and have previously corresponded.
NAMA accused of treating PAC with
'contempt'

This morning members of the PAC decided to

suspend business to allow members to read
correspondence that arrived in late from from
NAMA.
Labour TD Alan Kelly and Ms Connolly
accused NAMA of treating the committee
with "contempt" as the detailed opening
statements from NAMA only arrived at the
committee at 8.20am, 40 minutes before
today's 9am meeting.
Members from across the political spectrum
are angry that they have not had the
opportunity to read the documents ahead of
the meeting as they were sent in to them so
late.
Ms McDonald echoed a similar tone and
said: "NAMA need to understand that as a
consequence of this approach that this will
not be the last time they are before us."
"This examination will be finished when it is
complete and when we have answers to all
the questions."
Fine Gael's Ms Madigan added: "This is not
the way we should be conducting business."
She said that if this was a legal case,
business would be adjourned until legal
teams had the opportunity to read the
material.

Report on progress of the Review of the

sale of the National Asset Management
Agency property loan portfolio in
Northern Ireland

https://namawinelake.files.wordpress.co
m/2016/03/namaprogressreport.pdf

NAMA loan sale: Prepare

for 1bn property
overdrive
04/03/2014

The proposed loan sale of NAMA's

complete Northern Ireland-based
portfolio is under way, but what will its
eventual purchase mean for the
commercial property sector and wider
economy here? Declan Flynn points
towards the future.
Prepare for take-off when Project Eagle
finally lands. The ramifications will not only
send the local commercial property sector
into overdrive but will have wider
implications for our economy, especially
construction and its affiliated sectors.
RW: 34248856 k: reference-default-34248856-secbusiness_opinion-art e: 20m d:
We understand there are numerous potential bidders for
Project Eagle, which reportedly was purchased by Nama
for just over 1bn.
These will include private equity firms such as Pimco,
Starwood, Apollo and Lone Star, the latter having

purchased the majority of the IBRC UK loan book last

week including some assets here in the north.
A blind bidding process will be undertaken, with loan
companies and private equity firms given access to a data
centre of information on the sites and buildings that
make-up the portfolio.
Included in the loan sale will be numerous buildings in
central Belfast, but there will also be plenty of less
appealing stock included across the country.
It has also been noted that data centre information is
limited, which will make the bidding process difficult, with
the potential buyers scrambling for information. When we
launched our third annual report, The Lisney Northern
Ireland Commercial Property Report, in November, I
stated that the outlook for 2014 was good, but no one
could have foreseen such an upturn in events.
But what will the eventual winner of Project Eagle do with
the portfolio?
One thing for sure is that it is very unlikely that there will
be the fire sale so dreaded by politicians, who on the other
hand, criticised Nama for the slow release of its portfolio
here.
Some of the attractive assets will be sold and we've seen a
high level of investment activity from institutions, pension
funds and private equity firms who view Belfast as an
attractive purchase given the good value it represents.
In fact, over the last year investments have doubled
compared to 2012 and six-fold on 2011.
Our view is that it is likely that the majority of the portfolio
will be held and asset-managed, with a view to increasing
the value before a resale. This is likely to generate
significant projects for the construction industry in new
builds and the complete refurbishment of some Grade B
and C office stock.
The importance of the sale of Project Eagle cannot be
underestimated for the wider economy and although it
may take time before it lands, we should already be
preparing to welcome the eagle.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/busine
ss/opinion/nama-loan-sale-prepare-for1bn-property-overdrive-30059363.html

Analysis: how to sell a loan

portfolio like NAMAs 3.5bn
Project Eagle
Posted on February 24, 2014 4:24 pm
by CoStar News

.entry-meta
NAMAs launch of the potential sale of its
Northern Irish property loan portfolio could solve
an enormous problem for the Irish bad bank in
one sale, but how would a deal work and what is
the likelihood of a sale? CoStar News weighs up
the probabilities.

PIMCOs reverse-inquiry prior to Christmas for NAMAs

entire Northern Irish loan book probably took the bad
bank by as much surprise as it did the market.
Of course, there are some attractive near-prime assets
within the loan book which no doubt PIMCO would like,
but there is also considerably less appealing stock as well
as poor quality landbanks.
CoStar News understands the size of loan portfolio,
dubbed Project Eagle, is less than first reported, and more
like 3.5bn, according to NAMAs end of 2012 annual
results.
The difference between this figure and the reported 4bn
could reflect NAMAs initial expectation that it would
transfer 4bn of loans across, or is inclusive of Northern
Irish borrowers loans in other jurisdictions.
Regardless of this, Project Eagle is purely the Northern
Irish property and development land loans which had a
gross unpaid balance of 3.5bn or 2.9bn and at which

NAMA paid around 1.3bn or 1.07bn, which reflect

approximately a 63% discount, CoStar News understands.
The Project Eagle sale process is something of an aboutturn for NAMA which has until now sold only around
three to four assets per year, barely scratching its legacy
holdings, much to the criticism of many, including some
politicians which have accused NAMA of stonewalling
Northern Irelands recovery.
But, on the other hand, if one international buyer comes in
and takes out the entire loan portfolio, there is the danger
of uncertainty in what a new owner of the debt would do;
for example, would the Project Eagle winner look to
increase their loan margins or enforce over the assets and
sell?
The likely bidders on Project Eagle are difficult to engage
at this stage. The largest private equity funds are likely to
be sceptical because the data available within the Northern
Irish market is of low quality, which is expected to be
reflected in the data room.
Added to which, CoStar News understands that NAMA is
not commissioning fresh property valuations for the
Project Eagle assets which makes carrying out due
diligence and pricing the loan portfolio more difficult, with
latest valuations in the data room likely to be circa 2009.
Recent loan portfolio bidding processes has shown that
where uncertainty exists, steeper discounts prevail.
While it is early days in Project Eagle, the likely targeted
bidders include the obvious big private equity firms in
addition to those interested in being an early mover in a
yet-to-recover market where they could instantly become a
dominantly player in one trade.
The familiar list will undoubtedly include Cerberus, Lone
Star, Apollo and Starwood Capital, as well as possibly
others such as Republic of Ireland early-movers
Blackstone and Kennedy Wilson, and even Oaktree
Capital, Fortress and Goldman Sachs.
The list of genuinely interested and capable buyers is
likely to be smaller still. Some will bid solo and others in

consortiums with loan servicers and minority equity

investors, such as CarVal Investors, Pepper Asset Services
and CR Investment Management. Local property
developers are likely to be sought out to partner with the
big private equity firms.
Last year, the transactional market was just 160m in 17
transactions and just over 90m in eight transactions in
2012. The buyers across these 25 deals over the last two
years are markedly different from investors in direct
commercial property transactions in Ireland.
These buyers likely to be the exit acquirer for a private
equity fund buyer if such a buyer for Project Eagle
emerges include: Scottish Widows, Threadneedle
Investments, Development Securities, LaSalle Investment
Management, OLIM Property, Brockton Capital, British
Land and Cordea Savills as well as segregated CBRE
Global Investors mandates for Shell Pension Fund,
Hampshire County Council and Hines.
These investors see buying in Belfast as an extension of
their regional UK appetite and a market where they can
achieve more attractive yields than neighbouring North
West towns and cities, such as Liverpool, Manchester,
Wigan, Blackburn, Preston and Rochdale.

How would a Project Eagle loan sale be

structured?

The best comparable here is NAMAs first major loan

portfolio sale, the 810m Project Aspen, a portfolio of
Irish commercial property and development land which
sold to a Starwood Capital-led joint venture with NAMA
retaining a 20% stake.
The following figures are meant to be illustrative only
and not indicative of the known trajectory for Project
Eagle.
If Project Eagle were to sell for 25 cents in the euro, as has
been mooted, this would imply a sale at a price of circa
875m for the 3.5bn gross unpaid balance, compared to
NAMAs estimated purchase price of 1.3bn.

In sterling terms, a 75% discount on the gross 2.89bn

Project Eagle loan portfolio would equate to a 722.5m,
compared to NAMAs estimated 1.07bn.
The NAMA losses at 475m or 347.5m would be
substantially mitigated by the near six years in quarterly
interest payments which NAMA would have accrued since
2010.
NAMA may also seek to structure the sale in a joint
venture similar to Project Aspen, in which the Starwood
Capital consortium acquired an 80% stake and NAMA
retained 20%.
If this structure was repeated for the Project Eagle sale, it
would allow the Irish taxpayers to benefit from the value
created by a foreign buyer of the legacy debt: a win-winwin for the acquiring investor, NAMA and the Irish
taxpayer.
In the Project Aspen transaction, NAMA also provided
vendor financing given the still dormant property lending
market at the time.
If Project Eagle were to sell, NAMA may have to offer
backstop finance to finance the trade in the event that no
commercial or investment bank offers loan-on-loan
financing.
Using the Project Aspen 80-20 equity split and 60% LTC
financing as a model for how the Project Eagle could be
structured, in euro terms, 525m in vendor or third party
finance would be required alongside 350m in equity
capital.
If this equity was split 80-20 between the buyer and
NAMA, the Project Eagle winner would pay 280m while
NAMA would own a 70m equity stake.
In sterling terms, Project Eagle would require 433.5m in
vendor or third party finance and 289m in equity capital,
split 231.2m by the Project Eagle winner and 57.8m for
NAMA.

NAMA prepares 4bn Project Eagle

Northern Ireland loan portfolio

Posted on February 21, 2014 3:49 pm
by CoStar News

.entry-meta
NAMA is preparing to launch the sale of its entire
4bn Northern Irish commercial property and
development land loan portfolio following
PIMCOs reverse-inquiry prior to Christmas in a
process dubbed Project Eagle.

Lazards has been instructed to sell the Northern Irish loan

book after PIMCOs reverse-inquiry prompted NAMA to
consider the viability of a sell-off of its entire exposure in a
development likely reinforced by a political imperative for
Irelands bad bank to seize the opportunity to accelerate
its overall wind-down.
The challenge associated with selling Project Eagle centres
around building an adequate data room for prospective
bidders to analyse in order to price the loans, which the
Irish Times last week reported could fetch around 1bn,
implying a 75% discount.
However, the quality of data is thought to vary
considerably across the portfolio meaning discounted cash
flow (DCF) analysis will be challenging, and could
potentially result in the portfolio being sold off partially or
in sub-pools although no decisions are thought to have
been made as yet.
Additionally, selling the development land component
may prove tricky given the lack of availability for
development finance.
This week, Irelands finance minister Michael Noonan has
told NAMA to assess the viability of an accelerated windup of NAMAs remaining loan book indicating he believed
demand for real estate was sufficient to support large scale
purchases.
Last month, CBRE forecast that improving economic

conditions would bolster demand for new office

accommodation in the Northern Ireland market in 2014
with demand expected to emanate from the expansion of
existing occupiers as well as from new entrants.
The property consultants expect prime office rents in
Belfast to increase by 20% to reach 161.46 per sq m (15
per sq ft) by year-end.
In its 2014 outlook for Northern Ireland, CBRE wrote last
month: 2014 is shaping up to be a busier year for the
commercial property market in Northern Ireland, fuelled
to a large extent by improving economic indicators and by
some improvement in the availability of debt funding.
We expect to see further new development and
refurbishment starting in the Belfast office market in 2014,
as a result of the scarcity of Grade A office accommodation
in the city, although shortages will remain until such time
as these new office schemes come on stream.
We expect to see rental growth emerging in the office
sector during 2014 for the first time in many years, with
prime rents expected to increase by as much as 20% this
year.
However, it is likely to be some time before rental growth
re-emerges in the retail and industrial sectors of the
market.
Last year Northern Irelands transactional activity was just
160m across in 17 transactions, compared to 92m in
eight transactions in 2012, according to CBRE, with 68%
in retail and 25% in offices by value.
NAMA has opened the data room on the delayed Micheal
OFlynn loan portfolio, the 1.8bn Project Tower, which
has been retained at its full original size despite some
deliberation over excluding the UK student
accommodation component.
Project Towers loans are largely performing but much of
the debt is due to mature this month.
On Tuesday, CoStar News reported on a frenzy of 27.bn
in live European property loan portfolios sales. The report
can be seen here.

Bidders emerge on legacy IBRC

portfolios amid 27bn frenzy of
live European property loan sales
Posted on February 19, 2014 4:00 pm
by CoStar News

.entry-meta
Europes real estate loan portfolio market has
entered its most frenetic period as finalists
emerge on the legacy IBRC portfolios, projects
Salt and Rock, as private equity, hedge fund and
investment banks pore over as much as 27.7bn in
live loan portfolio deals in a frenzy of deleveraging activity.

CoStar News understands that a joint bid by CarVal

Investors and Goldman Sachs Special Situations Fund has
progressed to the final on the 1.46bn Project Salt
portfolio in competition with Cerberus Capital
Management, Oaktree Capital and Lone Star.
The two-tranche Project Salt is the only IBRC loan
portfolio in the sell-off process, managed by special
liquidators KPMG, which is not restricted by caps on
future cash flows and asset valuation discounts. This is
because Project Salt loans were originated in the UK
within two subsidiaries which are not part of liquidation
proceedings, IBRC Property Lending Limited (IPL) and
IBRC Asset Finance (IAF).

Project Salt is comprised of 609 loans to 233 borrowers,

which include 91 separate borrower connections, with a
gross loan balance of 1.46bn, against a quoted real estate
value of 914m across 350 properties, which implies Salts
aggregate LTV is 159.7%.
Project Salt is expected to trade at a discount to the
quoted real estate value of 914m, dated July 2013.
CoStar News wrote a detailed report on the Project Salt
portfolio back in November, which can be seen here.
Lone Star which has bid across all five loan portfolios
which additionally comprise the 9.3bn Project Stone, the
1.8bn Project Sand, and the 0.8bn Project Pebble is
thought to be the only bidder which has submitted for the
entire 4.82bn Project Rock.
A raft of bidders for individual loan tranches and bespoke
pools of tranches have also been submitted on Project
Rock by Cerberus, Kennedy Wilson, Starwood Capital,
Oaktree and Marathon Asset Management as well as the
underlying borrowers seeking to buy back their own debt
at varying discount levels.
Project Rock is comprised of 816 loans from 319
borrowers and 217 borrower groups with a gross unpaid
balance of 4.82bn, against a recorded real estate value of
3.94bn.
Project Rock is comprised of 14 separate tranches: the
first three tranches are large multi-borrower sub-pools
with a combined gross unpaid loan balance of 2.6bn,
while the remaining 11 tranches consist of individual
borrower group tranches, many with multiple underlying
loans, and make up the 2.2bn balance.
By geography, Rock is 86% UK, 7% US, 3% in each
Germany and Northern Ireland while Ireland, Sweden,
Spain and Hungary together making up the balance with
1% or less.
By sector, Rock is weighted to hotels, mixed-use and
leisure properties, with 24%, 22% and 21%, respectively,
based on carrying real estate value. These three segments
amount to 2.5bn of real estate value, or just under two-

thirds of Rocks total portfolio by property value, at 63.8%.

Back in December, CoStar News wrote a detailed report
on what is inside Project Rock, which can be seen here,
as well as a separate report on the standalone hotel
tranches, which can be seen here.
CoStar News understands that the 9.3bn Project Stone
IBRC loan portfolio, for which the deadline for final bids
are now due in early March, is expected to receive bids
from Deutsche Bank, Lone Star, Apollo and Cerberus as
well as a consortium comprised of CarVal Investors,
Goldman Sachs Special Situations Fund and Pepper Asset
Services.
The 12-tranche Project Stone is a heavily distressed
commercial real estate loan portfolio, with 42% of the
gross unpaid balance, or 3.9bn, secured by Irish assets;
40%, or 3.7bn, secured by UK assets; 15%, or 1.39bn,
secured by Continental European assets; with the 3%
balance, or 279m, secured by properties in the rest of the
world.
The level of distress in Project Stone is thought to vary,
with the Irish component around 20 cents in the euro,
while the UK portfolio likely above 60 cents.
It remains to be seen whether pricing submitted by
bidders aligns with the pricing hurdle restrictions imposed
by Michael Noonan, Irelands Minister for Finance, on 10
May last year. These restrictions require bidders to cap the
discounts on future cash flows and asset valuations to
4.5% and 2.32%, respectively.
IBRCs 1.8bn Project Sand is thought to be a two horse
race between Lone Star and Oaktree Capital, CoStar News
understands while bids on the fifth and final IBRC
property loan portfolio, the 0.8bn Project Pebble, are still
unclear at this stage save for Lone Stars bid.
Project Sand is comprised of residential mortgage loans
predominantly secured on Irish collateral with a gross loan
balance of circa 1.8bn, while the 800m Project
Pebble loan portfolio is comprised of commercial real
estate loans originated through the Irish offices of IBRC.

There is one borrower connection on Project Pebble,

which is Paddy McKillen, a separate report on Project
Pebble can be viewed here.

NAMA launches 1.8bn Project Tower,

RBS ready 850m Irish CRE loan
portfolio

Separate to the KPMG-managed IBRC loan portfolio sales

process, NAMA is understood to have finally returned the
delayed Micheal OFlynn loan portfolio to market this
week, with a select group of private equity firms and
investment banks invited to bid on the process known as
Project Tower.
CoStar News understands that last summer Micheal
OFlynn approached five potential investors Lone Star,
Apollo, Blackstone, Cerberus and Starwood over the
acquisition of its performing property loan book in NAMA,
which then amounted to around 1.8bn.
Last October, Lone Star bid more than 1bn for the
OFlynn property loan book, according to the Irish
Independent.
However, the process stalled and in the subsequent four
months, OFlynn has sought to persuade NAMA to not
include the senior loans secured by his UK
student accommodation portfolio, which would have
shrunk the loan book to around 1.3bn.
NAMA is thought to have decided to keep the book at its
original 1.8bn size and has so far invited around half a
dozen investors to bid for the loan pool, now dubbed
Project Tower. The data room opened on Monday.
CoStar News understands the investors which has so far
been invited to view the data room include Lone Star,
Goldman Sachs, Blackstone, Apollo, Cerberus and
Deutsche Bank.
Also in Ireland, RBS is expected to push the start button
on its accelerated Irish commercial real estate deleveraging within its Ulster Bank subsidiary, with both a
loan portfolio and a direct property portfolio expected to

come to market. The RBS loan portfolio, which is being

sold by Eastdil Secured, is thought to be between 850m
and 1bn.
Further details are expected on the vision for RBS Ulster
Bank subsidiary and indeed the new bad bank, RBS
Capital Resolution, on Thursday 27 February when RBS
publishes its 2013 annual results.
In addition, PIMCO lodged a reverse inquiry with NAMA
for the Irish bad banks 4bn Northern Ireland loan
portfolio prior to last Christmas which could trigger yet
another major loan auction process.
On Monday, Hibernia, Irelands second incorporated
REIT, acquired a 150m Ulster Bank senior loan for
67m, secured by a multi-family portfolio formerly owned
by Dorville Homes, reflecting a 55% discount, CoStar
News understands.
The loan was secured by 17 assets of varying sizes, all of
which are located in Dublin except for two. The
centrepiece asset is the partly-completed multi-family
residential block at Wyckham Point, Dundrum, Dublin 16,
which has 213 units. When fully let, Wyckham Point is
expecting to offer 3.5m in gross annual rent and will
deliver a 6% net initial yield.
Last week, CoStar News also reported on the 225m
NAMA Project Drive loan portfolio, comprised of loans to
Brian OFarrells N1 Property Developments. EY is selling
Project Drive.

Nationwides 850m Project Adelaide

offered to circa 15 bidders

Last week, Nationwides 850m German sub and nonperforming granular commercial property loan portfolio
came out, Project Adelaide, in a selective blind auction
process comprised of more than 15 invited bidders.
The long list of invited bidders on Project Adelaide is
thought to include Lone Star, Apollo, Pimco, Oaktree
Capital, Fortress Investment Group, Starwood Capital,
Marathon Asset Management, BAML, Deutsche Bank,

TPG, Goldman Sachs, Colony Capital and Davidson

Kempner.
Project Adelaide has a granular underlying collateral
asset pool comprised of around 200 assets spread
throughout the country and a diversified mix of retail and
offices, as well as other asset classes.
CoStar News reported on the process at the end of
January, which can be seen here.
Deloitte is selling Project Adelaide. First round bids are
due in in early March.
On the Continent, Commerzbank is selling the formerlynamed Eurohypo subsidiary, the 4.4bn Spanish
commercial real estate loan portfolio, dubbed Project
Octopus, while Lloyds is down to a four-strong shortlist of
BAML, Starwood, Marathon and Cerberus on the 600.1m
Project Aberdonia.
All of which activity makes this the most frenetic period
for European property loan portfolio sales with an
estimated 27.74bn in live loan portfolio sales, according
to data compiled by CoStar News.
In addition to which, there is the slow-burning potential
sell-off of the 11.8bn West Immo performing
property loan book, which could feasibly sell or
continue to stall, if included, the total of live
European property loan portfolios rises to
an astonishing39.94bn.
CoStar News reported in January that PIMCO has been
evaluating a possible bid since last autumn, as well as ING
Real Estate Finance, while two US investment banks are
also thought to be keen.

Lloyds selects four finalists for

600m Project Aberdonia loan sale

Posted on February 12, 2014 3:03 pm
by CoStar News

Lloyds Banking Group has selected a four-strong

shortlist of private equity and hedge funds for its
probable final Continental European commercial
property loan portfolio sale, Project Aberdonia.

CoStar News can reveal that BAML, Cerberus Capital

Management, Marathon Asset Management and Starwood
Capital have all been selected to progress through to the
second and final round.
Project Aberdonia is comprised of one 526m senior loan
and one 63m mezzanine facility extended by HBOS to
Industrial Securities, the pan-European industrial
investment manager and subsidiary of Marcol Group.
In addition there are two loans, originated in local Polish
currency, against two properties equivalent in euro terms
to approximately 10.4m for the senior loan and 0.7m
for the mezzanine loan.
Project Aberdonias 600.1m aggregate debt is secured by
82 properties, predominantly in France and Germany,
valued at 279m by CBRE immediately prior to the loan
portfolio sale, implying a portfolio LTV of 215.1%.
CoStar News understands that first round pricing on
Project Aberdonia came in at around 260m.
Against this, first round indicative pricing reflects a 56.7%
discount to Aberdonias gross unpaid balance, and just a
6.8% discount relative to CBREs recent valuation.
The four Aberdonia finalists will be entitled to speak with
the management team of Industrial Securities, with whom
Lloyds agreed a pre-loan sale agreement to the effect that
Industrial Securities would be part of the subsequent asset
management workout of the property portfolio.

This was agreed in order to secure the consent of

Industrial Securities to consent to the sale of its loan to a
third party.
Talks between the four finalists and Industrial Securities
will enable bidders to crystallise the nature, schedule and
priorities of a consensual work out strategy. In turn, this
will enable bidders to form a view on their final pricing for
the portfolio, based on their targeted end returns for the
investment.
Final bids, due in early March, could rise or fall depending
on the outcome of those talks. UBS is selling Project
Aberdonia for Lloyds.
Marathon is the notable bidder to make the shortlist, given
that the hedge fund won Lloyds Project Chamonix,
another Continental property loan portfolio, one year ago.
Around 80% of Chamonixs property portfolio by value
for which Marathon paid 400m was the loan security
of debt facilities extended to Marcol Group, which is
Industrial Securities parent company.
Also in the final shortlist is Cerberus which has become a
serial winner of Lloyds commercial property loan
portfolios in less than two years, having won the two major
Project Hampton sub-pool, projects Bravo and Charlie, as
well as projects Indie and Thames.
CoStar News reported on the details of Project Aberdonia
two weeks ago, which can be seen here (which includes an
overview of the real estate portfolio by geography and
CBRE valuation).

Lloyds sold 10 European property loan

portfolios for just under 3bn in 2013

Lloyds Banking Group sold 10 European property

loan portfolios with an aggregate unpaid loan
balance of 6.83bn in 2013, against which the
bank recouped approximately 2.95bn, according
to CoStar News calculations.
Lloyds, which reports its 2013 results tomorrow morning,
closed the sale of five Continental European property loan

portfolios, three Irish portfolios including two which

were announced in 2012 but did not close until the first
quarter of 2013 and two UK loan portfolios.
Lloyds European commercial property loan portfolio sales
comprised projects Chamonix, Indie, Alpha, Bravo and
Charlie.
These five commercial property loan portfolios
approximately carried an aggregate gross unpaid balance
of 2.8bn, against which Lloyds recouped around 1.8bn,
according to CoStar News calculations based on its own
compiled data.
Lloyds three Irish commercial property loan sales
namely, projects Pittsburgh, Lane and the single Moran
hotel loan carried a combined approximate aggregate
gross unpaid balance of 2.3bn, against which Lloyds
recouped approximately 317m.
Finally, the two UK commercial property loan portfolio
sales projects Thames and East together amounted to
gross unpaid balances plus swap liabilities of 714m,
against which Lloyds recouped around 415m.
Aggregating these three pools together, Lloyds 10
European property loan portfolios on a sterling basis
and applying an average exchange rate of 1: 1.2
amounts to 6.83bn in total property loan liabilities,
against which Lloyds has recouped approximately
2.95bn.
The difference between the gross unpaid balance and the
recouped cash has been written-down by Lloyds
piecemeal, on a quarterly basis, as the bank has been able
to afford to do so. The reduction in risk-weighted assets
over the year will have been capital accretive for Lloyds
overall balance sheet.
These calculations are entirely unofficial and primarily
based on aggregating information over the course of
CoStar News journalistic sourcing of Lloyds property
loan portfolio disposals, including the original unpaid
balances and subsequent trade prices.

Suitors circle over resurrected

sale of WestImmo property

lending business
Posted on January 20, 2014 3:40 pm
by CoStar News

Westdeutsche Immobilien (WestImmo), the

legacy European real estate lender which spun
into bad bank Erste Abwicklungsanstalt (EAA)
after a failed sale two years ago, is in talks with at
least two suitors seeking to prize the
predominantly performing 11.8bn property
lending business from German State ownership.

CoStar News understands that PIMCO, whose parent

company Allianz is itself an aspiring German property
lender, has been evaluating a possible bid since last
autumn, as has ING Real Estate Finance, while Aareal
Bank has pulled out of the process since completing the
acquisition of Corealcredit Bank from US private equity
firm investor Lone Star just before Christmas.
In recent weeks, at least two further US institutions are
thought to have expressed an interest in the deal, CoStar
News understands.
EAA will only sell WestImmo as an entire business, in the
vein of Commerzbanks UK Eurohypo business sale and
the live sale of the 5bn Spanish business, as opposed to
Deutsche Banks sale of Deutsche Postbanks UK loan
book to GE Capital Real Estate.
Aareal Bank pulled out of the process after deciding to
close its long-trailed acquisition of Corealcredit Banks

7.6bn European property loan book from Lone Star

for342m, in a deal which was considered simpler due as
the seller was more willing and the price agreed more
reasonably aligned with market dynamics.
By contrast, the potential sale of WestImmo is complicated
by German and European politics as well as the need to
crystallises further losses on a business which remains
profitable, albeit with declining revenues given the rundown trajectory of the European real estate loan book.
WestImmo, formerly the real estate lending subsidiary of
WestLB was the subject of a protracted 400m sale effort
to Apollo Global Management which ultimately failed in
December 2011.
At the time, West LB cited severe market deterioration
and an unacceptable final sale price offer which included
untenable extended liability risks for WestLB and its
owners.
While these issues were central to WestLB pulling the plug
on the sale, more fundamentally, the spike in macro
volatility at the time driven by the sovereign debt crisis
which in turn led to fears about a potential break-up of the
Eurozone exposed the impracticality of a private equity
fund seeking to buy such a larger loan portfolio financed
by short term money markets.
In post global financial crisis markets, short term money
markets cannot fund balance sheets of the scale of the
WestImmo business, and EAA will only sell the business
entirely. Financial institutions will access to affordable
long term money markets are, therefore, thought to be
among the only realistic buyers.
WestLB, which was mandated by the European
Commission to sell WestImmo as a condition of its 5.4bn
bailout package in October 2008, was transferred into
EAA, Germanys first bad bank post the global financial
crisis, with WestLB rebranding as Portigon.
In September 2012, WestImmos then 15.9bn European
property loan book transferred to EAA, which by the end
of September 2013 had been run-down to 11.8bn,

primarily driven by the loan run-offs at maturity,

enforcements as well as some loan sales and the internal
transfer of 0.6bn Japan real estate loans within the wider
bad bank.
In its interim results covering the three quarters to the end
of September 2013, published on 18 November 2013,
WestImmo re-confirmed: EAA continues the
privatization process started by WestLB at the time, and
still has the aim to sell WestImmo.
WestImmo now only does business in line with the
European Commissions resolution dated 20 December
2011 on the restructuring of the former WestLB Group.
Under this, WestImmo is still permitted to provide its
existing customers with loan renewals and to a limited
extent to top-up existing commitments in order to
implement restructuring.
While WestImmo is operating as a profitable business
with 71.9m of revenue for the 12 months to end of June
2013, the managed run-off of the portfolio is reducing
revenues and in turn its profitability, which to end of June
managed a pre-tax return on equity of 4.5%.

Nationwides 850m German

property loan portfolio out
next week
Posted on January 29, 2014 3:50 pm

Nationwide will sign up prospective bidders for its

circa 850m German commercial property loan
portfolio next week ahead of access to the data
room, finally bringing back to market the loan
portfolio which the UK building society first tried
to sell-off 18 months ago.
The German loan portfolio, to be christened with a project
codename this week, has a granular underlying collateral
asset pool comprised of around 200 assets spread
throughout the country and a diversified mix of retail and
offices, as well as other asset classes.

Nationwides German loan portfolio is one of three

Continental commercial property loan portfolios for sale,
along with the sale of Commerzbanks former Eurohypo
Spanish property lending business which includes 5bn
in commercial property loans and Lloyds Banking
Groups 529m Project Aberdonia.
Prospective bidders were expected to be granted access to
the data room on the Eurohypo 5bn Spanish property
loan book sale, codenamed Project Octopus, today, CoStar
News understands.
However, Lloyds Banking Groups latest and possibly
final Continental loan portfolio, Project Aberdonia, is
expected to receive several high-profile dropouts prior to
the first rounds of bidding.

Nationwide tries to sell German property

loan book for second time in two years

Nationwides circa 850m granular German commercial

property loan book is finally back up for sale for the
second time in almost two years, after repayments and
external refinanicngs have slimmed the total balance from
around 1.2bn almost two years ago.
Last time, prior to the summer of 2012, Nationwide
invited a handful of potential buyers including Apollo
Global Management, Lone Star, Deutsche Bank and
Cerberus Capital Management to bid on the loan
portfolio but a sale was pulled.
The aborted sale was owed to two reasons.
Firstly, Nationwide sought too great a recovery on its
capital, seeking around 95 cents in the euro, which was
significantly out-of-step with where pricing for the
portfolio came in at.
The UK building society would have had to crystallise
significant losses beyond the impairment provisions taken
had a trade been agreed.
Secondly, the quality of data provided to invited bidders
was inadequate which made the loan portfolio difficult to
price.

This time around, Nationwide has appointed Deloitte

which is thought to have prepared a more comprehensive
data room and has internally valued the assets
individually, using a desktop valuation methodology,
which has arrived at a value for the underlying real estate
of around 600m.
This would imply a trade of at least a 30% discount to the
unpaid loan balance, if not greater.
These four bidders invited last time are likely to bid again,
along with others such as hedge fund Marathon, which
won the Lloyds 850m Project Chamonix, which traded
for around 400m, as revealed by CoStar News.
The Nationwide loan portfolio is comprised of slightly
more than 30 separate borrowers, while virtually all of the
individual loans have unpaid loan balances of between
20m and 30m.
All the loans are senior, and there are no mismatched
interest rate swap liabilities on the portfolio. Around half
the loans are performing, although some are passed due,
with the balance split between sub and non-performing.
Data room access is likely to be granted in the week
beginning Monday 10 February, with first round indicative
bids expected to be called three to four weeks thereafter.

NAMA PROPOSAL FOR THE STEEL SECTOR IN

BANGLADESH.

http://www.ndf.fi/sites/ndf.fi/files/attach/n
ama_report_august_15_mop_2.pdf

Analysis: The latest mortgage arrears

figures should worry us a lot
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Paul Joyce

Mortgage arrears may no longer be as closely attended as

they once were, but the problem is clearly far from being
resolved and the long-standing struggle for survival
endures for many households, writes Paul Joyce.

Many familiar patterns remain: The overall number of

accounts in arrears has again decreased, but the number
that has been in arrears for over two years remains
stubbornly high at over 34,500 accounts.
With only a very marginal decline in this category of
people with arrears of over 720 days, it is by definition
increasing as a proportion of the total number of people in
arrears.
Significantly, one in every four of these accounts is held
either by a retail credit firm (which means a sub-prime
lender) or an unregulated loan owner (which roughly
translates as a vulture fund).
The growing amount of arrears in these long-term cases

an average of close to 64,000 per account is

alarming.
This indicates there is no way back for many of these
accounts unless measures such as writedown of the
principal debt and a proper mortgage-to rent scheme are
put in place.
Otherwise, an increase in repossessions in the middle of
the housing crisis seems the likely outcome.
Some 421 family homes were repossessed in the latest
quarter, either by the execution of a possession order or
through voluntary surrender.
Another mounting area of concern that often passes
without detailed comment is the position of accounts
already restructured.
The running total of such accounts is now 121,140 with a
further table in the statistical release setting out the
percentage of these restructures meeting the terms of the
arrangement.
Of particular interest here is the progress of the now most
common and growing forms of restructure: Capitalisation
of arrears and split mortgages which now account for over
half of the restructures between them.
Capitalisation of arrears is now the largest category, at
close to one in every three restructured accounts.
In brief, a capitalisation of arrears arrangement involves
the borrowers paying an increased monthly instalment
over the remaining term of the existing mortgage to make
up for already missed or partially missed payments.
This means borrowers will have to pay more each month
over the rest of the mortgage than was due to be paid
when the arrears problem developed.
By definition, the borrowers financial position would need
to have significantly improved to justify this.
It is of great concern, then, that just over 78% of these
borrowers are currently meeting the terms of the
arrangement, meaning that well over 8,000 accounts are
not, and are accumulating fresh arrears.
Split mortgages now account for more than a fifth of
restructures, having dramatically increased over the last
three years, not least because they have been promoted
by the Central Bank itself.
A split mortgage involves the borrower paying capital and

interest on a portion of the mortgage with payment on the

remaining capital being suspended (generally, though not
always, with no interest being charged).
Although many households signed up to such offers with
relief, they are only too aware in most cases a substantial
capital sum will fall due when the period of the split
mortgage comes to an end and there is no guarantee as
to how this will be treated by the lender.
Worse, given a split mortgage will involve a lower monthly
payment than the borrower undertook, one in 20 (close to
1,400) split mortgages are already failing to meet the
terms of the new arrangement.
The number of restructured accounts not currently
meeting the terms of the arrangement is over 15,000, or
one in eight.
Given that the Central Bank is responsible for monitoring
the sustainability of mortgage arrears solutions, we should
expect it to carry out a proper investigation into the failure
rate.
Otherwise, we will continue to see some mortgage lenders
force square pegs into round holes in some cases,
especially since it involves no or very little writedown of
debt on their part.
Paul Joyce is senior policy analyst at FLAC, the Free
Legal Advice Centre.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/a
nalysis-the-latest-mortgage-arrearsfigures-should-worry-us-a-lot434965.html
Brendan-McDonagh,-CEO-NAMA-Sunday-Bus-Post-PAC32-R-80-A-(vi)--http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/med
ia/committees/pac/correspondence/2016
meetings/meeting183-29092016/PAC32R-80-A-(vi)---Brendan-McDonagh,-CEO-

NAMA--Sunday-Bus-Post-18.09.16.pdf
Investing in Ireland The Reserve Euromoney Conferences 09.05-09.30
Opening Address- ... Brendan McDonagh,
Chief Executive, ... 16.10-16.20 Why
Choose Ireland? Keynote Addresshttp://www.euromoneyconferences.com/
Assets/8/7669/elements/Ireland
%202015%20Working%20Agenda.pdf

Belfast firm
Tughans under fire
over 7m
earmarked for
politician as Nama

row escalates
By Joanne Harris 6 July 2015 15:51

An Irish MP has alleged that 7m in an account

controlled by Ian Coulter, the former managing
partner of Belfast firm Tughans, may have been
intended to facilitate payments to a Northern Irish
politician in connection to the sale of assets by the
Irish National Asset Management Agency (Nama).
/imported-standfirst
The allegations were made by independent Teachta
Dla (TD, or MP) Mick Wallace in the Irish
parliament last week. Wallace said that 7m in an
Isle of Man bank account which was discovered
during an audit of Tughans had been earmarked for
a Northern Ireland politician.
Coulter left Tughans earlier this year and the firm is
now managed by Patrick Brown.

Coulter

In a statement Tughans said: Our former managing

partner diverted, to an account of which he was the
sole beneficiary, professional fees due to the firm

without the knowledge of the partners. We have

since retrieved the money and he has left the
practice.
Following internal investigation Tughans voluntarily
brought the circumstances leading to Ian Coulters
departure to the attention of the Law Society of
Northern Ireland. Tughans has cooperated fully with
LSNIs inquiry. That inquiry is ongoing. The firm
awaits the outcome of the inquiry before deciding
which other agencies should be notified.
The allegations concern the 2014 sale of assets by
Nama to Cerberus Capital Management. According
to a statement from a Nama spokesperson, the sale
was initiated after US firm Brown Rudnick
approached it on behalf of client Pacific Investment
Management Company (Pimco), following which a
competitive sales process for the assets was
launched.
The Nama spokesperson said in March 2014 Pimco
informed the agency that its compliance staff had
discovered that the private equity houses proposed
fee arrangement with Brown Rudnick included also
the payment of fees to Tughans and to a former
external member of Namas Northern Ireland
Advisory Committee (NIAC).
Although the NIAC member was not a member at
the time of the sale and had no access to

confidential information, the Nama board had

determined that the arrangement could undermine
the integrity of the sale.
Nama viewed this disclosure as a very serious
development and the Nama Board met on 11 March
2014 to consider the most appropriate course of
action, said the statement. The Board decided that
if Pimco did not withdraw, Nama could not permit
them to remain in the sales process.
On 12 March 2014, Nama indicated its serious
concerns to Pimco about the proposed fee
arrangement and, in particular, the proposed fee
payment to the former member of the NIAC. On 13
March 2014, Pimco informed Nama that it would
withdraw from the Project Eagle process.
The competitive tender was later won by Cerberus,
which was also advised by Brown Rudnick.
Cerberus paid 1.6bn for 5.7bn worth of loans.
Hogan Lovells acted for Nama and the agencys
spokesperson said Nama had paid no fee to
Tughans or had any engagement with the firm.
Cerberus gave Nama written confirmation and have
confirmed again that no fees were paid to any party
that ever had a relationship with NAMA, the
statement continued. Tughans issue is internal to it
and has no relevance to Namas open competitive

sales process.
Tughans statement added: Tughans remains
constrained by what it can say, however the firms
position is that no part of its professional fee is
payable or will be paid to any third party, politician
or advisor.
Brown Rudnick said in a statement it had been
engaged by Cerberus after originally assisting
another bidder. The firm said it had agreed in a
formal mandate letter to share its fee from Cerberus
with Tughans and the arrangement had been
disclosed to Cerberus and Nama.
We did not engage, or enter into any agreement
with, any other party in connection with the
transaction or in connection with the fee, nor did we
share our fee or make any payment to any other
party. Payment of the fee to Tughans was made
directly to a Tughans bank account pursuant to an
invoice from Tughans for professional fees in
relation to the transaction, the Brown Rudnick
spokesperson added.
In the context of the engagement, this firm received
representations from Tughans covering compliance
with laws and regulations including the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery Act and,
on the back of those representations, made
equivalent representations to Cerberus. In addition,

both this firm and Tughans represented directly to

Cerberus, and Cerberus represented to Nama, that
no fee, commission or other remuneration or
payment was payable to any current or former
Board member of Nama, any current or former
member of the executive of Nama or any current or
former member of an advisory committee of Nama
in connection with the transaction.
This firm acted in compliance with applicable law
and with the utmost propriety at all times throughout
the transaction on behalf of its client.
In a statement Cerberus said it was deeply
concerned over the allegations.
It added: We are meticulous in our approach to
business and do not tolerate inappropriate actions
such as the ones that have been alleged. We insist
on the same high standards of conduct from our
advisers. In this matter, as is our standard business
practice, we codified these expectations in our
engagement letters with our advisers so that there
was no room for interpretation.
Specifically, we engaged Brown Rudnick as our
lawyers to supplement our primary legal team from
Linklaters and assist us in our bid for Project Eagle.
We have had a long standing relationship with
Brown Rudnick in the United States. They informed
us that they had been previously working with

another interested party that was no longer involved

in the process. We were not aware, and we were
not made aware, of the reasons why their former
client was no longer involved. Given the timing, and
the complexity of the bid and the underlying assets,
we believed that we could benefit from Brown
Rudnicks prior work.
Brown Rudnick informed us that they wanted to
retain Tughans as a Northern Ireland based legal
firm to supplement its work. In our engagement
letter with Brown Rudnick, we received
certifications, representations and warranties
covering a number of issues including compliance
with all laws and regulations including the US
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the UK Bribery
Act. We insisted Brown Rudnick require Tughans be
bound by the same standards and Brown Rudnick
received the same from Tughans.
Nama requested that we confirm to it that no fee,
commission or other remuneration or payment was
payable to any current or former Board member of
Nama, any current or former executive of NAMA or
any current or former member of an advisory
committee of Nama in connection with any aspect
of our participation in the tender process. After
receiving confirmation from Brown Rudnick, and a
similar confirmation by Tughans to Brown Rudnick,

we provided such confirmation to Nama.

Consequently, to our best knowledge, no improper
or illegal fees were paid by us or on our behalf by
our advisors.
Cerberus added that it had no knowledge or
reason to believe that the Project Eagle sales
process was conducted with anything but the
utmost integrity.
In 2013 figures provided by the Irish Ministry of
Finance showed that a raft of firms had earned
millions of euros in fees since the establishment of
the bad bank in 2010. Hogan Lovells had picked
up the lions share, 4.1m (12 February 2013).
Loan portfolio sales have provided significant
amounts of works for Irish firms in the past year or
so as the countrys economy picks up again (15
June 2015).

Arthur Cox takes

lions share as Irish
state legal fees

revealed
By Joanne Harris 12 February 2013 17:15

The Irish governments go-to law firm Arthur Cox

has picked up almost half of the legal fees paid out
by the state in the last five years.

According to figures published by the Department of

Finance in response to a Parliamentary question
tabled by Sinn Fin deputy Mary Lou McDonald,
over 71.6m has been spent on lawyers fees by the
Office of the Minister of Finance, the National Asset
Management Agency (Nama), the National
Treasury Management Agency (NTMA), the
National Development Finance Agency (NDFA) and
the National Pension Reserves Fund (NPRF) since
2008.
Of that total, just over 33m has gone to Arthur Cox.
The firm has established itself as the go-to firm for
the state on a number of the complex financial
restructuring instructions that have occurred in

Ireland since the financial crisis, including most

recently the restructuring of bank debt leading to the
liquidation of the former Anglo Irish Bank (7
February 2013).
The single biggest fee paid out in the last five years
was the 8.4m fee received by Arthur Cox in 2011
for its advice to the NTMA on restructuring the
banking system. The firm also received 920,967
on the same instruction in 2010.
The firm has also been advising the Minister of
Finance on ongoing banking restructuring issues,
earning 16.5m over the course of the five-year
period. That figure included 2.8m paid out last year
in respect of ongoing legal advice to the
shareholding management unit on the restructuring
of the Irish banking system, related litigation, further
emerging issues and issues related to development
of proposals with Troika, according to the
Department of Finance.
Meanwhile, legal fees paid out by Irelands bad
bank Nama have now reached 39.4m, up nearly
12m from last years figure of 27.6m (13 February
2012). Due diligence fees have totalled 14.8m, but
have resulted in a reduction in the amount Nama
has paid for loans of 477m, according to the
agencys 2011 annual report.
Hogan Lovells has earned the most from Nama,

with a total income of 4.1m since the

establishment of the agencys panel in 2010.
Most of this has been due diligence fees, which
dropped off significantly last year. Allen & Overy
(A&O) has also done well from Nama, earning a
total of 2.5m in the last three years.
Arthur Cox has earned 3.9m from Nama, with
some of the other big Irish firms also among the big
earners. A&L Goodbody has brought in 2.5m from
the agency, while McCann Fitzgerald was paid fees
of 2.4m. Matheson (previously Matheson Ormsby
Prentice) has received fees of 2.1m.
The Irish office of offshore giant Maples and Calder
is also on the Nama panel, earning 2.5m in the last
three years.
A large number of firms from around the world have
been involved in Nama-related transactions, with
UK, US, offshore and European firms all taking a
share of the fees. In 2012 the bulk of fees, 7.8m,
are expected to be recoverable from Nama
borrowers. Out of 11.5m in borrower recoverable
fees paid to firms so far, Nama said it had
recovered 3.6m.
Allen & Overy, Hogan Lovells, and Irish firms
including A&L Goodbody, McCann Fitzgerald and
Matheson have also provided advice on a range of

issues for the other agencies set up in response to

the crisis.
For example, in 2012 A&L Goodbody advised the
NTMA on the establishment of asset disposal unit
New Economy and Recovery Authority (NewERA),
earning 43,000 from the instruction. Meanwhile,
McCann Fitzgerald picked up 19,760 for advice on
compliance matters.
Several international firms have profited from advice
given to the NPRF, notably Proskauer Rose, which
has been giving private equity investment advice
worth 668,261 between 2008 and 2012.
The Department of Finance said it is currently
tendering for a panel of external law firms for Irish
advice for the NPRF. However, it said that because
of the specialist nature of the legal services required
in foreign jurisdictions, these services have not
been tendered.
The Irish government announced this
morning (Friday 27 April) that it has
appointed the managing partner of Dublinheadquartered Arthur Cox, Pdraig
Rordin, as chair of the new Financial
Legislation Advisory Forum.
Irelands minister for finance, Brian Cowen,
said that the financial services sector was
key to the growth of the Irish economy.
The establishment of the forum, which will
help prepare a bill to streamline the existing

legal framework for financial services

regulation, was announced by Cowen in
December 2006.
Rordin will advise the forum on the
updating of the legislative framework
governing financial services regulation in
Ireland.
The work of the forum will help ensure that
we have a world-class legal framework which
keeps the financial sector at the forefront of
innovation and competitiveness while at the
same time promoting the interests of
consumers, said Cowen.
I am very pleased that Mr Rordin has
agreed to take on the important role of the
chair.
The financial services sector directly employs
more than 22,000 people in Ireland and
accounts for around a third of all the
countrys services exports.

Arthur Cox, MOP

advise on Anglo
Irish
nationalisation
By The Lawyer 19 January 2009 00:00

Irish firm Arthur Cox has been called in by the

Irish Government to work on the

nationalisation of Anglo Irish Bank.

/imported-standfirst
A bill is being heard in the Irish parliament
today to enable the government to take
control of the bank, which has been hit by a
private loans scandal.
Arthur Cox managing partner Pdraig
Rordin is leading a team advising the
government. He is the chairman of the
governments advisory forum on financial
legislation and has been advising the
Republic since September last year, when
ministers announced a bank rescue plan.
Other partners from the Irish firm working on
the nationalisation include capital markets
partner Cormac Kissane, and corporate
partners Thomas Courtney and Cianran
Bolger.
Matheson Ormsby Prentice, which has been a
regular adviser to Anglo Irish for the last few
years, advised the bank in the run up to
nationalisation and continues to act as its
main legal adviser.
Partner Robert Heron is leading the team
advising the bank alongside a group of
partners including Tim Scanlon, Fergus
Bolster and Pauline ODonovan.
Shares in Irish banks have plummeted
following the nationalisation of Anglo Irish,
which was plunged into crisis when it was
revealed that former chairman Sean
FitzPatrick had secretly borrowed up to
127m (115m).

Eight directors have since resigned from the

board.
To subscribe to our free Lawyer News Daily
news and comment email, click here. Or get
the latest news, features and comment as its
published with our free RSS feed.

Irelands National
Assets
Management
Agency unveils
64-strong legal
panel
By Margaret Taylor 27 January 2010 17:48

Among the list of 64 firms, announced by the

National Treasury Management Agency, was
Eversheds ODonnell Sweeney, Ivor
Fitzpatrick & Co, LK Shields, Maples & Calder,
Mason Hayes & Curran and Matheson
Ormsby Prentice, as well as a number of
smaller Dublin and regional firms.
Nama will reportedly spend as much as
2.6bn (2.27bn) on professional fees and
expenses over the next 10 years. The spend

property valuations and accountancy

services as well as legal.
Nama was established in 2009 to rescue
Irelands battered banks. The agency bought
between 80-90m worth of development
loans from the banks using tax payers
money. The loans will be redistributed back
into the market, freeing the banks up to start
lending again.
The bulk of the work being handed out by
Nama is related to due diligence on its loans,
although there is also some corporate
structuring work. The aim is to transfer the
first tranche of loans within the next month,
and have all the loans transferred by June
2010.
Nama needs so many firms on its panel
because of the sheer volume of loans taken
on and because theyre operating under a
tight deadline, said Andrew Muckian, head
of commercial property at William Fry. But
the primary reason is because of the conflicts
of interest. Most property transactions take
three sets of lawyers; acting for the buyers,
sellers and the bank, and a firm would be
conflicted out [and unable to advise Nama] if
it represented any of these parties in the
original loan.
So Nama has all these firms so it can
overcome the problem of conflicts, but it
wouldnt necessarily employ every firm on
that panel.

Official Frank Cushnahan

was present at Nama selloff talks - then later
advised one of the
bidders
Exclusive by Shane Phelan
PUBLISHED
19/08/2015

Frank Cushnahan

A Nama advisory committee discussed

potential purchasers of assets controlled by
the agency on at least two occasions prior to
the controversial 1bn sale of its Northern
Ireland loan portfolio
Documents reveal both meetings of the agency's Northern
Ireland advisory Committee (NIAC) were attended by
former banker Frank Cushnahan, who later acted as an
advisor to one of the bidders for the portfolio, global
investment firm Pimco.
The revelation comes just weeks after Nama chairman
Frank Daly gave assurances to the Dail Public Accounts
Committee (PAC) in Dublin that Mr Cushnahan "did not

gain any confidential information or any useful insider

information" from being a member of the NIAC.
Mr Cushnahan has been at the centre of controversy ever
since it emerged last month he would have been paid 5m
if Pimco had been successful in acquiring the portfolio,
which was known as Project Eagle.
The businessman has held a series of executive and nonexecutive positions in the public and private sectors in
Northern Ireland.
He was chairman of the now-defunct east Belfast
maintenance firm Red Sky.
After learning of his involvement, Nama requested Pimco
withdraw from the competition.

Documents released under the Freedom of Information

Act show the topic of purchasers and potential purchasers
of Nama assets was discussed by the NIAC at least twice in
the 10 months running up to the sale of the portfolio.
These were at meetings in the Ballymascanlon House
Hotel in Dundalk on July 15, 2013, and at Tughans
solicitors in Belfast on October 7, 2013.
The full content of these conversations is unknown as
Nama has redacted those sections of meeting minutes.
However, a spokesman said: "As the Nama chairman
stated to the PAC, no external member of the NIAC had
access to confidential information relating to the sale of
the Northern Ireland portfolio. This includes information
on the identity of bidders."
A statement issued by Mr Cushnahan's solicitor last month
said he firmly denied any wrongdoing and would fully cooperate with any police investigation. Mr Cushnahan was
appointed as an external member of the NIAC by the then

Finance Minister Brian Lenihan in 2010 on the

recommendation of Stormont finance minister Sammy
Wilson. He remained on the committee until November
2013, when he resigned for personal reasons.
Nama placed its entire northern loans portfolio, relating to
55 debtors and 900 properties, on sale in early 2014 and it
was bought that April by US vulture fund Cerberus.
Issues surrounding the sale are being investigated by the
National Crime Agency, amid allegations of political
kickbacks.
Parliamentary committees on both sides of the border
have also launched inquiries.
The probes were initiated after Independent TD Mick
Wallace alleged last month in the Dail that 7m in an Isle
of Man account had been earmarked for a northern
politician or party in connection with the deal.
Cerberus has denied making or planning any
inappropriate payments.

Project Eagle: Taoiseach to

meet with opposition over
"important issues" in report
A report into the sale process used to get rid of the Northern Ireland
loan book will be published today.
Sep 14th 2016

DID NAMA LOSE out on a potential hundreds of millions

of euro as it sold off its Northern Ireland loan book?
A report due to be published later will put the handling of
that sale process under a critical, political spotlight.
According to the Comptroller and Audit General (C&AG)
audit, the so-called bad bank did not get the highest value
possible for the sale, which became known internally as
Project Eagle.
Cabinet discussed the 700-page document today before it
is published this afternoon.
In a statement, the government said that the report raises
a number of important issues which the Government
acknowledges will require further investigation.
The Public Accounts Committee is an appropriate forum
for consideration of the C&AG report and for the exercise
of public accountability in these matters. The Government
expects that the PAC will wish to convene a public hearing
at an early date. It would welcome such a public hearing
and will offer any support that the PAC needs in the
conduct of its inquiries.
The Government also recognises that it has its own
responsibilities to ensure that all matters of public concern

with regard to the functions of an important public body

such as NAMA are fully addressed.
It has therefore decided that the Taoiseach will invite
Opposition party leaders to meet him tomorrow with a
view to seeking agreement on the issues of public concern
that require further investigation and the most
appropriate nature and terms of reference for such an
investigation.
Subject to the outcome of those discussions, the matter
will then be the subject of a Dil debate early in the new
session.
Public Accounts Committee
Speaking to RTs Primetime last night, PAC chair Sean
Fleming confirmed that Nama chairman Frank Daly and
CEO Brendan McDonagh as well as the Comptroller
will attend a hearing next week.
Fianna Fils Fleming has already broached the idea of a
collaboration with the Stormont Committee on Finance in
Northern Ireland. Previously, Nama officials refused an
invitation to act as witnesses as it was an authority outside
this jurisdiction.
Fleming wants both entities to act as proxies for each
other.
In his plan, members of the Stormont Committee on
Finance could request PAC members to ask certain,
specific questions. They could then watch proceedings in
the visitors gallery. A reciprocal arrangement would then
be put in place in the North.
The proposal will be put to the PAC when it meets next
week. The Laois-Offaly deputy hopes to have wrapped up
the investigation with a report published by the end of
the year.
Fleming also wants to ask Finance Minister Michael
Noonan to attend the hearing on Thursday, 22 September
to answer questions about the sale of the 800 properties
attached to the loan book.
What was Project Eagle?
In 2014, Nama quietly sold its Northern Ireland property

portfolio to a US investment firm called Cerberus Capital

Management.
That deal codename Eagle has since become massively
controversial. For one, independent TD Mick Wallace has
alleged that 7 million that was deposited in an Isle of
Man account was destined for a Northern Ireland
politician.
He also stood up in the Dil and told TDs that the 800strong loan book was sold for 1.5 billion to the private
equity company, despite having been worth 4.5 billion.
The report does not deal with any possible improprieties.
And, according to Noonan,
Theres nothing in it that suggests theres anything illegal,
anything improper, or any irregularities in the way that
Nama behaved.
However, advance leaks of the report suggest hundreds of
millions of euros were lost due to shortcomings in the
transaction.
The audit looks at whether the sales process was
problematic when attempting to ensure the best monetary
outcome. It was commissioned after allegations that
Belfast businessman Frank Cushanan, who had been
advising Nama, had also been working for a US company
seeking to buy the state agencys Northern Irish property
portfolio.
Cushnahan has denied any wrongdoing.
Nama is expected to strongly contest all findings of the
C&AG audit.

Mick Wallace wont go to

garda with Nama info just
yet
The Wexford TD is calling for an independent investigation into
concerns surrounding Namas Northern Ireland property deal.
Jul 5th 2015

INDEPENDENT TD MICK Wallace has stepped up his

calls for an investigation into the sale of the National Asset
Management Agencys (Nama) Northern Ireland loan
book.
Earlier this week, the Wexford deputy told the Dil how
this portfolio, Project Eagle, was sold for 1.5 billion to a
US private equity firm despite having been worth 4.5
billion.
Nama has said it is satisfied that the process delivered the
best possible return that could have been achieved for
Irish taxpayers following advice received from an
investment bank.
Wallace added that a routine audit of a legal firm involved
in the process, Tughans of Belfast, revealed that 7
million sterling ended up in an Isle of Man bank account.
It was reportedly earmarked for a Northern Ireland
politician, Wallace said.
Tughans said in a statement to the media this money was
retrieved and the partner responsible left the firm.
BBC News reports today at least 6 million of these
diverted funds was intended to facilitate payments to

deal-makers involved in the sale of the portfolio.

Speaking this afternoon to RT Radio 1s This Week
programme, Wallace said he has details of a politician
involved in this, but needs to check the validity of the
claims.
Contrary to what people might think, I go to great lengths
to avoid abusing Dil privilege he said.
The Independent TD called for the Minister for Finance to
request an urgent report on the sale of Project Eagle.
Not good enough
Gerry Adams joined the calls for action from Michael
Noonan, writing to him to request a full statement to the
Dil on the issue.
The Sinn Fin Leader highlighted that was the largest sale
by Nama.
It is not good enough that the Government remains silent
on this issue which has handed on a massive loss to
citizens, he said in a statement.
Mick Wallace accused Government ministers of being too
quick to call for the information to be passed on to the
relevant authorities.
What I would say back to the minister is, how about you
initiate an independent inquiry into whether Nama has
actually delivered the best results in the interest of the
taxpayer?
Given that they still have assets to sell, at least cut our
losses now, and lets stop things being done wrong if thats
the case. And if things are done right, well the
investigation will show that up one way or the other.
He said passing the information to garda, who already
have too much on their plate, or a Northern Ireland
commission wouldnt solve the problem.
Wallace, along with Cerberus and Nama officials, has
already been requested to attend a meeting of Stormonts
finance committee who want to examine the 7 million in
question.
If the Government wants to put an end speculation around

the workings of Nama, theyre going to have to initiate an

independent inquiry.
In a new statement issued by Nama this afternoon, the
agency addressed the 7 million diverted from the sale to
the Isle of Man account by saying: Attempts to conflate
NAMAs process with an internal Tughans issue are
entirely wrong.
A spokesperson for Nama explained this afternoon that
the agency was approached by a third party for the Project
Eagle portfolio, but this was rejected.
Nama told one of the bidders it would have to withdraw
because of a fee arrangement to parties that included a
former member of Namas NIAC (he was not a member at
the time of the sale and never had access to confidential
information but the NAMA board determined that this
arrangement could undermine the integrity of the sale).

The NIAC had no role in the sale process.

The spokesperson added that the lone sale broker engaged
with other interested parties, with Cerberus ultimately
coming out on top by paying the highest price.
They notedthat Nama paid no fee to nor had any

engagement with Tughans law firm on this sale. NAMAs

legal advisor was Hogan Lovells.
Cerberus gave NAMA written confirmation and have
confirmed again that no fees were paid to any party that
ever had a relationship with NAMA.
Speaking to the same programme, the Minister for Justice
Frances Fitzgerald said Wallace should pass the
information on to the relevant authorities. She noted that
the Comptroller and Auditor General has access to Nama
files and can investigate themselves if a concern arises.

She called for more of the facts to be made public before a

decision is made on a cross-border inquiry is launched.
The Minister noted that this process would be legally
complicated.
Minister for Public Expenditure Brendan Howlin told The
Week in Politics that he believes the sale of the portfolio is
worthy of investigation, and the Public Accounts
Committee will have the ability to carry it out.
http://www.thejournal.ie/mick-wallace-nama-gardai2199196-Jul2015/

Leaders Questions: Mick Wallaces raises

issues of malpractice within NAMA with
the Tanaiste.
Jul 2, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqJGjf2Oi58

agreed-letter-to-nama-additional-questions COMMITTEE
FOR FINANCE AND PERSONNEL ... What was the role of
the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee ... what
information would members have access to, can NIAC
http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/committeeblocks/finance-and-personnel/20150902-agreed-letter-to-namaadditional-questions.pdf

Arthur Cox advises

as Irish government
restructures bank

debt
By Joanne Harris 7 February 2013 17:38

A team from Irish firm Arthur Cox has seen the

completion of five years of work acting for the Irish
government with todays confirmation that a deal
has been struck to restructure the nations bank
debt.

The firms former managing partner Pdraig

Rordin led the Arthur Cox team as it worked
closely with the Irish Attorney-Generals department
to draw up the necessary legislation which will
liquidate the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation
(IBRC), formerly the Anglo Irish Bank, and the Irish
Nationwide Building Society.
The deal announced today with the European
Central Bank (ECB) allows the Irish government to
replace 25bn (21.3bn) of promissory notes, which
were used to bail out Anglo Irish and Irish
Nationwide, with long-term government bonds with

maturities of up to 40 years.
The agreement will mean Irish taxpayers avoid a
payment of 3.1bn (2.7m) due every March for the
next 10 years to cover the losses sustained by the
two institutions. It also means the liquidation of both
banks is complete and there is a 20bn (17.1m)
reduction in the payments due by the state over the
long term.
Irish Taoiseach, or prime minister, Enda Kenny told
the parliament this morning: Todays outcome is an
historic step on the road to economic recovery.
Other Arthur Cox partners involved in the
restructuring and liquidation included capital
markets head Cormac Kissane, company
compliance and governance head Thomas
Courtney, financial services regulation partner
Robert Cain, litigation partner Isobel Foley and
corporate insolvency partner John Donald.
Background to the deal:
Arthur Cox was first instructed by the Irish
government on the capitalisation of Anglo Irish in
2008 and followed up by acting on the banks
nationalisation in 2009 (20 January 2009) with
Matheson Ormsby Prentice (now Matheson)
representing the bank.
The firm is a regular adviser for the state, also

appearing on the National Asset Management

Agency (Nama) panel alongside 63 other firms (27
January 2010). Last year it was revealed Arthur Cox
had earned a total of 3m in fees from Nama, more
than any other firm (13 February 2012).
Arthur Cox has also just won a spot on the UK
Governments new legal panel, as part of the major
or complex projects sub-panel (31 January 2013).
In 2007 Rordin was appointed as chair of the
newly-established Financial Legislation Advisory
Forum (27 April 2007).

Irelands lawyers
tell a tale of two
economies
Banking Inquiry Committee signs off final
report
The Oireachtas Banking Inquiry Committee today agreed and
signed off on its final report following consideration of
submissions from affected parties.
The Oireachtas Banking Inquiry Committee today agreed and
signed off on its final report following consideration of submissions
from affected parties.
Committee Chairman Ciaran Lynch said: As required under
legislation, a number of individuals and institutions were sent
copies of the report and were entitled to respond to sections
relating to them. We have now completed this part of the process
of reviewing the responses and submissions received and have

agreed and signed off on our final report.

As the first committee to carry out its work under new legislation,
we were entrusted to examine one of the major events in the
history of this State, a crisis which has impacted on every
household in Ireland.
The final report contains three volumes volume one: the main
report; volume 2: recommendations for changes to the legislation
for future running of inquiries; and volume three will involve the
publication of all the documentary evidence considered in
preparing the main report.
Agreement on our final report reflects the positive and
constructive approach members have adopted throughout this
process. Id like to take this opportunity to thank the Committee
members for their hard work and commitment throughout the
inquiry and in agreeing and signing off on a final report.
A parliamentary inquiry is a complex project, requiring a dedicated
and expert team working behind the scenes to support the work of
the Joint Committee. In this regard, I would like to thank the
secretariat and investigators for their work, especially over the
holiday period to ensure that the committee maintained its
schedule to publish in January.
Under the Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and
Procedures) Act, the Committee must allow a 21 day standstill
period before the final report can be brought before both Houses of
the Oireachtas.
Further information on the Oireachtas Banking Inquiry can be
accessed on www.oireachtas.ie/bankinginquiry
All media enquiries in relation to the Oireachtas Banking Inquiry
should be addressed to: "
Ciaran Brennan,
Houses of the Oireachtas,
Communications Unit,
Leinster House,
Dublin 2

P: +3531 618 3903

M: 086-0496518
F: +3531 618 4551
All general enquiries should be directed to the Committee
Secretariat.
e. contactbankinquiry@oireachtas.ie
t. +353 1 618 3651
Committee Membership
Deputies
Ciarn Lynch (Chairman)
Pearse Doherty
Joe Higgins
Michael McGrath
Eoghan Murphy
Kieran ODonnell
John Paul Phelan
Senators
Sean D Barrett
Michael DArcy
Marc MacSharry
Susan OKeeffe

https://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/me
diazone/pressreleases/2015/name31200-en.html
Increased shareholding in Slaney Foods by
the ABP group considered by the Agriculture
Committee
At yesterdays meeting of the Joint Committee on Agriculture,
Food and the Marine, Committee Members considered the
move by the ABP Food Group to acquire a 50% shareholding
in Slaney Foods. This increase in shareholding marks a
significant shift in the operating interests in the national kill.

16th December 2015

Committee Chairman, Andrew Doyle TD, said Slaney Foods, the
parent group that controls both Slaney Meats and Irish Country
Meats, represents a significant operator within the industry and
any consolidation between ABP and Slaney Foods must be
examined in great detail. The Committee today highlighted the fact
that any possible move should be in full compliance with the
Competition rules regarding monopolies and should uphold the
common good and to protect the interests of the producers and
consumers alike".
The Committee believes the economic principles of fair and open
competition to be the corner stone of success in any market and
so any possible change to the balance of operations within the
national kill industry should be of significant interest. The
Committee agreed to highlight the context of the operating
environment with the Competition and Consumer Protection
Authority in order for their considerations to take into account the
wider operating position and the effect of any possible future
moves.
Price volatility has been a matter of great concern for farmers
around the country and any move that may impact on this, requires
the full attention of the relevant regulatory authorities. At the heart
of our concern is the protection of product quality and integrity
within the Irish agricultural industry.
Ends
Media Enquiries:
Liam O'Brien,
Houses of the Oireachtas,
Communications Unit,
Leinster House,
Dublin 2
P: +353 1 618 4484
M: +353 86 189 5098
liam.obrien@oireachtas.ie

Committee Membership:

Chairman: Andrew Doyle, (Fine Gael)

Deputies: Tom Barry (Fine Gael); Pat Deering (Fine Gael); Martin
Ferris (Sinn Fin); Martin Heydon (Fine Gael); amon Cuv
(Fianna Fil); Willie Penrose (Labour Party); Thomas Pringle
(Independent); Arthur Spring (Labour)
Senators: Michael Comiskey, Denis Landy, Paschal Mooney, Mary
Ann OBrien, Brian Domhnaill, Pat ONeill