I move amendment No. 1: In page 8, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on NAMA performance 7.The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before both Houses of the Oireachtas a report on the performance of NAMA including a specific analysis on the potential for higher returns to the State had the property portfolio been managed for longer rather than sold off.” We discussed this at length on Committee Stage and I want to put on the record again that I genuinely believe that NAMA has failed in its obligations, its duties and what this House set out for it in terms of the legislation, which I opposed and one of the Government parties opposed at the time. NAMA was to recover the assets of the State at that time. The book value of the loans was €74.4 billion. NAMA purchased those loans for €31.8 billion. That means it got a reduction of €42.6 billion. The job of NAMA at the time was to recover all of the money. The Ministers went on television and said that developers would be chased to the ends of the earth to secure that money. If property prices did not recover then it could not actually manage assets and could not sell assets to realise values that did not exist, but the reality is that asset prices have recovered and, in some cases, have surpassed where they were at the time. That is not universally the case and there are portions of land that did not have planning permission, that were overvalued or where the loans taken out should never have been given. However, generally, property prices have recovered. Therefore, we should ask ourselves a question. How, if NAMA bought loans for €42 billion less than what the book value was and property prices have recovered over the ten years, when the job of the agency was to manage the assets and recover the full cost or as much as it could, it made a surplus of only €5 billion? That €5 billion sounds like big money for ordinary punters out there, but in the context of a €42 billion haircut and the context of recovering all of its assets, I believe it is a staggering failure. It is a staggering failure because NAMA was also interfered with in terms of the direction of the Government. Michael Noonan made it very clear that he wanted to find a floor for the property market back in 2013 when he invited in the vulture funds. They made no bones about this. They were very clear that they rolled out the red carpet, welcomed the vulture funds for this State and pressed NAMA into what was, in my view, a fire sale of assets at the wrong time, incurring huge loses to the Irish taxpayer as a result. NAMA did not just fail in that regard. The Comptroller and Auditor General has the unique task in this State to look at expenditure and value for money in Government Departments and also in respect of NAMA. The Comptroller and Auditor General in the 2024 report concluded: NAMA did not achieve the residential output target. As at the end of 2021, it had delivered 11,049 units on sites in which it has an interest. This represents delivery of 55% of the target, a year later than originally projected. A return of 55% of the target is appalling. That is really bad in the middle of a housing crisis. There is nothing to be writing home about regarding that. The C and AG went on to say: NAMA estimated that sites sold by NAMA debtors/receivers by end 2024 had the potential to deliver 105,000 residential units. By end 2024, an estimated 27,108 units had been constructed on sites sold. This level of delivery represents just 26% of the estimated overall capacity of the residential development sites sold by NAMA debtors/receivers to end 2024. Anybody who sat the junior certificate or leaving certificate last week and got a result of 26% got a big, fat "F". That is a failure, and that is what NAMA has done in relation to the housing part of it, never mind the billions of euro that could and should have been collected in the recovering-property scenario of its objectives. That is why the amendment before us is crucial. It is crucial that there is: "a report on the performance of NAMA including a specific analysis on the potential for higher returns to the State had the property portfolio been managed for longer rather than sold off." I argue the Irish people deserve nothing less. It is their money. It is their children who were forced to emigrate because of the policies of Fianna Fáil at that time, because of how Fianna Fáil wrecked the economy, because it cosied up to the bankers and developers and bust not only the banking situation but also the construction situation and had our public finances in such a weak position that so much damage was done. As we wind up NAMA in this legislation, it is important that the full truth is exposed and that everybody knows what the missed opportunity was here, what NAMA was tasked with and why it did not recover more than the €5 billion additional it did recover. That is the question. I do not know what the Government is hiding from. I do not know why the Government does not want the Irish people to know that. Is it because the Minister of State knows, in his heart of hearts, that NAMA should have recovered a lot more, that there was political interference in relation to the strategy in terms of the vulture funds? I believe that is the case. Otherwise the Minister of State may surprise me, support this amendment and allow the public to have what we are asking for, a report. That is all we are asking for. Just show the public the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That is what we are asking for so please support the amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.01
In regard to the reasons I outlined, I understand the Minister of State has to defend NAMA and his position but the facts speak for themselves. The Comptroller and Auditor General's facts also speak for themselves and for that reason, I am pressing the amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.00
I move amendment No. 2: In page 8, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “Report on transfer of staff to NTMA 7.The Minister shall, within 1 month of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before both Houses of the Oireachtas a report detailing all of the transfer of staff from NAMA to the NTMA, provide information on salary and if any existing vacancies were filled or new positions created within the NTMA in addition to the resolution unit.”. I also raised this with the Minister of State on Committee Stage. The bumper salary of the CEO of NAMA has turned into an ongoing saga and nobody wants to answer questions on it. The Government's fingerprints is all over this because, obviously, it wanted that individual to end up being in a wee cosy job it has earmarked for him as the housing tsar but that all fell asunder as well. We have been stonewalled on this for months. Information should be available to the public as to whether the NAMA CEO is going to keep his €430,000 salary when he returns to the NTMA. That is a salary he has as a result of him being the CEO of NAMA. It was never intended for him to return from NAMA because the Government wanted him as the housing tsar until that fell apart, when the public was outraged that he would be paid so much to do what is essentially the Minister's job. When that fell through, the section in the heads of the Bill that said all staff of NAMA, when it was wound up, would be transferred to the resolution unit of the NTMA to handle the residual activity was taken out of the legislation when it was published. We all know that the NAMA CEO will return to the NTMA but not to the resolution unit. What we do not know is whether he is going to keep his salary despite no longer being a CEO. What we also do not know if there is an existing vacancy at senior management team level or if that job is going to be created for him. What we are missing here is transparency, and I believe it is a disgrace in regard to transparency. There should be no reason for secrecy or hidden information in this regard. We are talking about how public money is spent and how the Government is refusing to answer questions and has gone to great lengths to hide it from any real oversight. We are winding up NAMA. The Government produced legislation to say that everybody, including the CEO, was supposed to go into the resolution unit but it did not tell us at the time it published that legislation that it had another plan for the CEO. It wanted to second him and make him the housing tsar with a huge salary because it wanted its Minister, who was not up to the job, to have a dig-out from a housing tsar. Now, when that fell apart, the Government has had to create a new system and it will not give us any information on it. This is not on because it is public money at the end of the day. The NAMA CEO is now going to go into a senior role in the NTMA. Is it being created for him? Is there a vacancy? Is one being created to justify him keeping a salary of €430,000? I have no idea because the Government will not give us the information and it is a scandal, in my view. It is a murky ending that is all too fitting for the role NAMA has played in our society. Between Committee and Report Stages - because these questions were asked of him on Committee Stage - he should now know this information and he should put it on the public record in the House. I would be happy to hear that there is a vacancy with a reduced salary, that he will be taking that up, and that the Minister of State is transparent in giving us the criteria or the salary range. However, if it is just more stonewalling, what are we on the Opposition benches or the general public supposed to conclude from all of that? That is why we have tabled the amendment, which makes it clear that it is not acceptable that the Minister of State has made these types of arrangements and that we have within six months a report laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas detailing all the transfer of staff from NAMA to the NTMA, providing information on salary and whether any existing vacancies were filled or new positions created within the NTMA, in addition to the resolution unit. Outside of all that, we do not need the report. What we need is just a bit of transparency and a bit of upfrontness from the Government. It was because of all this dodgy cageyness and not being transparent with the public that the Government's plans for the CEO of NAMA fell through. It created a wee job for him, somebody the public perceived as an insider who was already in a well-paid position. That is no disrespect to the individual himself but the Government created the situation and put him in that situation. Now, the Minister of State is in a position where he is not being transparent. We do not know where the CEO is going. We do not know if there is a job being created. We do not know if a vacancy exists within the NTMA. This is all basic information that should be said in public. It should be said that there is a vacancy at senior management level in the NTMA, the salary range is between €150,000 and €250,000 for those types of management roles, and that is where he is going in because he was seconded from it. That would bring transparency to this situation or it might be a case, because I do not know, that a position is being created for the CEO, he will retain his salary of €400,000 or maybe he will take a wee cut of €50,000 - he will still be on €380,000 - and we are creating a job for him because the job does not exist, but he was not supposed to go there because the job the Government had for him fell through because he has handled it arseways. Therefore, will the Minister of State please tell us what is happening with the CEO of NAMA?
Sentiment score: 0.05
For the reasons that we are no wiser after the five-minute contribution from the Minister of State in relation to whether the CEO of NAMA is going to go into the NTMA on €430,000, whether there is going to be a vacancy there or whether a job is going to be created, I will press the amendment because, obviously, no light has been shone by the Minister of State on this issue.
Sentiment score: -0.05
I still have no more answers from what the Minister of State said. We still do not know what the salary scale is going to be, whether the job at senior level has been created, whether he is going to keep his €430,000 or whether the contract he has at the minute will actually be remuneration, which entitles him not just to €430,000 but a bonus of a portion of that. I think it is about 25% on an annual basis. In fairness, he has never accepted it to my knowledge. I stand to be corrected, but that is the case. Therefore, because we have no information and we are asking to wind up an agency where the individual will transfer, I am pressing the amendment. It is ridiculous that we do not have this information. It will come out sometime.
Sentiment score: -0.05
It will not come out in the annual report because as the Minister of State said, he is not an Accounting Officer. Therefore, we will never have-----
Sentiment score: 0.00
There is never a responsibility for him to publish what he is getting.
Sentiment score: 0.00
He could go into the NTMA and he could be paid €1 million and we would never know.
Sentiment score: 0.00
Hold on, with respect, the proposer of the amendment has three opportunities. I only took two. I am the only person who has a third opportunity. Is that okay?
Sentiment score: 0.33
Let me make the point again. This information will never come to light under the reporting, in the way the Minister of State suggests, because the former CEO of NAMA will not be an accounting officer. As CEO of NAMA, he had to disclose his wages, but now that he is going back into the NTMA, he does not. He is not an accounting officer, so it will not be reported. The issue here is that hypothetically he could be going back in on a million quid and we would never know. We would never know he would be paid that amount of money. We would have to deduce it was him, somebody else or whoever. The Minister of State is asking us to support legislation that is the transfer of his position into the NTMA. As I have said, the Minister of State has had two opportunities to address this issue. He has failed to address it. He has failed to tell us whether it is a new position or whether it is a position that is in vacancy. Again, if the Minister of State told me that there was a vacancy at senior management level and that the range of those senior management levels was X and Y, that would bring the issue to the conclusion. There is a huge issue around this here because this is somebody the Department never wanted to go into the NTMA. It wanted him to be the housing tsar on a huge salary. That fell through and now the Minister of State is not being transparent. I press the amendment.
Sentiment score: 0.02