COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Wednesday, 16 Nov 2016

Special Report No. 94 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: National Asset Management Agency Sale of Project Eagle (Resumed)

Chairman

Apologies have been received from Deputy Bobby Aylward.

Today the committee will continue its examination of the Comptroller and Auditor General's Special Report No. 94, on the National Asset Management Agency, NAMA, and its sale of Project Eagle. Project Eagle was the code name given to the sale of NAMA’s Northern Ireland loan portfolio. To date, we have met with representatives of NAMA, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan and his officials, and Mr. Brian Rowntree, a former member of NAMA’s Northern Ireland advisory committee, NIAC. We have also met three members of the current board and other senior NAMA officials. We are joined the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, as permanent witness and he is accompanied by Mr. John Riordan, deputy director.

Our main witness today is deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, Mr. Martin McGuinness, MLA. Mr. McGuinness has been in his current role since 2007. His communications regarding NAMA's sale of its Northern Ireland portfolio are of particular interest to us. He is accompanied by Mr. Mark Mullan. I welcome the deputy First Minister to the Houses and thank him for making himself available to the Committee of Public Accounts to assist in its examination of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report.

I remind members, witnesses and those in the Public Gallery to turn off all mobile phones, not just to silence them. They must be on aeroplane mode, otherwise they interfere with our recording facilities. I advise the witnesses that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person, persons or entity, by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 186 that the committee shall also refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government or the merits of the objectives of such policies. Members are reminded of the long-standing ruling of the Chair to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I am happy to attend today's hearing and to put on record my knowledge, limited as it was, of the Project Eagle sale, just as I have done with the Department of Finance and personnel committee in the North. As deputy First Minister, my only involvement was a conference call, on 14 January 2014, with the then First Minister, Mr. Peter Robinson, and the Minister for Finance in the South, Deputy Michael Noonan, during which Deputy Noonan informed us of his intention to put NAMA’s Northern portfolio on the open market as part of a competitive process. I also attended a courtesy meeting with Mr. Dan Quayle, a former Vice President of the United States, and a Cerberus delegation on 24 September 2014. This was after the sale. On 4 June 2015, I submitted an information request to the then Northern Ireland Minister of Finance, Ms Arlene Foster, MLA, seeking detail on how Cerberus, which had acquired the Project Eagle portfolio, was engaging with local businesses and whether the Executive could regulate the approach taken by the firm. Ms Foster responded to say her officials met Cerberus on a regular basis to emphasise her expectation that borrowers are treated in a balanced, fair and transparent manner.

As far back as 2010 the Executive was aware of, and supportive of, the intent to appoint Northern advisers to the NAMA advisory committee but there was no involvement by the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minster, OFMDFM, in the individuals appointed, Mr. Brian Rowntree and Mr. Frank Cushnahan. There was a process in place to take forward the sale. This process was under the stewardship of NAMA and the Minister for Finance in the South, not the Executive. Since then, we have all become aware that a number of other meetings and engagements took place involving various combinations of the Minister, Deputy Noonan, Northern Ministers from the Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, and representatives of NAMA, Cerberus and PIMCO. I was not aware of any of these engagements. I learned in the media that Dan Quayle had met with Mr. Peter Robinson, Mr. Simon Hamilton, MLA, Mr. Ian Coulter and others at Stormont Castle on 25 March 2014. I was also concerned to learn that Deputy Noonan had met with Mr. Robinson and Mr. Hamilton on 27 September 2013 at Stormont, again without my knowledge. The meeting, which PIMCO confirmed to the committee just last week, involving PIMCO, Mr. Robinson and Mr. Sammy Wilson, MP, in May 2013, also happened without my knowledge or approval. Similarly, the memorandum of understanding which Mr. Robinson’s private office sent to NAMA in January 2014 did not have my consent or approval. A draft memorandum of understanding was emailed to my adviser, Ms Dara O’Hagan, but I was not made aware of this due to the fact that it was still a draft document with no status. Had a formal submission been received from the Department of Finance, it would have been subjected to detailed scrutiny by departmental officials.

Economists would have assessed it and legal advice would have been obtained from the departmental solicitor’s office and, possibly, the Attorney General given the significance of the matter. Only when such a document had passed through all these scrutiny and accountability processes would it have been presented to me for consideration. None of this happened, as no formal submission was received from DFP and the matter was not pursued. Therefore, the memorandum of understanding, MOU, as sent to NAMA did not represent the Executive’s position. It had never been formally submitted or considered and it was not an Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, OFMDFM, document because it did not have the required joint approval. It had no status and, frankly, it is not worth the paper it was written on.

It is my view that all of these contacts raise legitimate questions about how the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, NAMA and others were handling the situation, but those are concerns that would need to be put to them. At the heart of this issue are the allegations made by Deputy Mick Wallace and the claim that the Irish taxpayer was massively short-changed in the Project Eagle sale. There are very serious questions which need to be answered and I am as interested as anyone in hearing the answers. I am happy to take questions from members.

Chairman

We will try to complete this meeting in approximately two hours. I will call Deputies in the sequence in which they indicated, as follows: Deputy Alan Farrell, Deputy Marc MacSharry, Deputy Josepha Madigan, Deputy Peter Burke, Deputy Catherine Murphy, Deputy Alan Kelly, Deputy Catherine Connolly, Deputy David Cullinane and Deputy Mary Lou McDonald.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I welcome the deputy First Minister to the meeting. I have no desire to rehash the questions and answers session which took place in the Assembly, the report of which is available for everybody to see. I would like to focus my remarks on the operations of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, which Mr. McGuinness has occupied for eight years alongside the First Minister, in respect of which some questions have arisen both in terms of what went on in Northern Ireland and in regard to other documentation regarding text messages and so on provided to the committee.

My first question for Mr. McGuinness is one already asked of him in Northern Ireland. Who is Dara O'Hagan? As I understand it Dara O'Hagan is a former officeholder who I believe works for Mr. McGuinness and has done so for some time. I think Mr. McGuinness described Dara O'Hagan as an experienced political operative. Although Mr. McGuinness referred earlier to the MOU document being one that did not have standing and to it being only a draft, it is an important document in the context of what was going on in the Project Eagle process at a particular time and the involvement of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister or, rather, the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. I appreciate the duality in that regard. I find it difficult to believe that a political party like Sinn Féin, in which Mr. McGuinness has been involved for 40 years or more, would not be in a position to recognise an important document and disseminate it appropriately. In regard to it not having come across Mr. McGuinness's desk, I can only take his word for that. I find it hard to believe that it was not disseminated for assessment to others within the political party of which he is a member with a view to it being brought to his attention because it was a significant document.

According to the Hansard transcript Mr. McGuinness said that he pressed the Taoiseach for a dedicated representative on the NAMA board to raise and highlight issues of concern to the Executive and Assembly and that he was presented with information by the Ministers, Deputy Michael Noonan and Sammy Wilson MLA, at bilateral meetings thereafter. What correspondence or discussion did Mr. McGuinness's office have with the Northern Ireland advisory board of NAMA, individuals in Dublin or the offices of An Taoiseach or the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, with regard to the process that was transpiring at that particular time and subsequent to the sale going through? What was Mr. McGuinness's involvement by way of notification given the opening line of his statement, which I appreciate, was to the effect that he had no involvement in this process other than a phone call?

Reference was made to a conversation between two staff members in Mr. McGuinness's office with regard to communications between the offices of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. There was some interesting correspondence, as provided by Deputy Connolly, in terms of communications between both of those offices. Although the First Minister is not accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts of Dáil Éireann, which is not in question, this loan portfolio would have a significant impact on Northern Ireland and the property market there. Notwithstanding what Mr. Robinson had to say about not receiving an invitation, which I cannot question, I find it difficult to accept, and would welcome Mr. McGuinness's view on this, that the previous First Minister would not submit to attending the Committee of Public Accounts given the importance of this transaction in Northern Ireland, never mind that the discussion is taking place in the Republic. Perhaps Mr. McGuinness would respond first to my last question and work his way back.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy might need to refresh my memory on some of the questions. On the Deputy's first question, Dara O'Hagan was a Member of the Legislative Assembly. She became an adviser in the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. She is a very experienced member of Sinn Féin. She is also a doctor and she is very well versed in economics. It was her view that the memorandum of understanding, MOU, was not something that I as deputy First Minister should sign up to.

The Deputy has to remember the context of all of this and how we were dealing with it in the North. The year 2013, when all of this began with a letter from Mr. Sammy Wilson to the Minister, was a very difficult year in the life of the Northern Executive. The reason for that was because prior to Mr. Peter Robinson going off on his holidays to Florida, I had a very serious conversation with him about moving forward decisively with the Maze-Long Kesh site. Maze-Long Kesh was to be, probably, one of the finest real estate areas in the whole of western Europe, one that obviously attracted a tremendous amount of attention because of the fact that Long Kesh prison was on it. The hospital where the hunger strikers died is there as well. We had an agreement that we would pursue, with the help of funds from the European Union to the tune of £80 million, the construction of a peace building-conflict resolution centre on that site. My side of the bargain was that I would agree to the move from the Kings Hall of the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society to Maze-Long Kesh. I kept my side of the bargain.

Mr. Robinson agreed, before he went off on his holidays, that he would go ahead with the construction of the peace building-conflict resolution centre. After he had been some days and even weeks in Florida, he sent a letter to his MLAs but not to me. I did not receive a phone call or message to my office. According to his letter, which found its way to the Belfast Telegraph, he was effectively reneging on the agreement made prior to him leaving. That brought about a very bad, even appalling, situation in terms of relationships because it was a gross act of bad faith on behalf of the DUP as a party. That presented massive difficulties for me, which lasted for a considerable period.

The question regarding this process starts with Sammy Wilson, the then Minister of Finance and Personnel. He never communicated with me at any stage anything to do with the sale of Project Eagle. In my view, all of his communications were through Peter Robinson. Sammy Wilson and Peter Robinson are members of the DUP so this was something they kept to themselves very closely. As a result of that, I found myself at a considerable disadvantage.

Deputy Alan Farrell

Can I interrupt Mr. McGuinness for a second? Notwithstanding the importance of his contribution, which I accept entirely, it illustrates a soured relationship and clearly one that was not conducive to the smooth running of such an important office.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was worse than that because there were people advocating that I should bring about the collapse of the institutions because of bad faith.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I recall. I was there.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was not prepared to do that and took some considerable flak.

Deputy Alan Farrell

Mr. McGuinness mentioned the qualifications of Dara O'Hagan and I accept that entirely. I might add that I am not going down the same lines as one of Mr. McGuinness's colleagues in Northern Ireland where the question-and-answer session was not really a question-and-answer session but political point scoring. I am far more interested in the breakdown in communication and the fact that between the personnel that both he and Mr. Robinson employ, there seemed to be a lack of recognition that notwithstanding what Mr. McGuinness said, this was an important document.

Mr. McGuinness said something interesting. He said that it was not something that was important enough to be brought to his attention. He said throughout that it was not brought to his attention. What Mr. McGuinness is effectively suggesting now - perhaps he suggested it previously but not in my presence - is that Dara O'Hagan made a decision that the document, although quite significant, was not important enough to be brought to Mr. McGuinness's attention and that, at the same time, there was a discussion going on in Peter Robinson's office and elsewhere within the DUP effectively to exclude Mr. McGuinness from any discussion of the process, thereby putting Mr. McGuinness in what I would conclude was a very difficult position in the context of the information flow between NAMA, the Department of Finance and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Would that be a fair assessment?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In respect of the way this was handled and even the communications between the Department of Finance in Dublin and the Department of Finance and Personnel in Northern Ireland, Peter Robinson did not include me. It is, as the Deputy rightly said, a joint office and I do not believe this was respected during that situation. There are even communications from the Department of Finance and Personnel through Peter Robinson's office that talk about meetings with him. That does present problems. We are all here with the benefit of hindsight and thanks to the massive contribution made by Deputy Wallace in making all this public last year.

At that stage of the process, there was nothing in my mind apart from the irregularity with which this was being handled due to the bad relationship as a result of the reneging on the agreement and the meetings that were being established. There was nothing in my head that suggested that there was wrongdoing by anybody regarding what has since transpired - the allegation that £16 million was demanded of PIMCO or indeed the £7 million that ended up in a bank account in the Isle of Man. All of this was as much of a surprise to me as it was to anybody else. There were no bad thoughts in my head at the time of this business other than I thought it was highly irregular that the meetings that had taken place were handled in the fashion they were. I understood it from the DUP's point of view. Relationships were appalling, which presented a massive difficulty that lasted for quite some time until we reached the achievement of the Fresh Start agreement at the end of last year.

Deputy Alan Farrell

In the context of that communication I referenced earlier between Mr. McGuinness's staff and that of Peter Robinson, in September 2013, there was communication between Richard Bullock and Vincent Parker relating to communications between Mr. McGuinness and the First Minister regarding PIMCO. A conference call took place a number of months later. To my knowledge, the conference call that took place in January 2014 discussed PIMCO's letter of intent. Am I right in assuming that Mr. McGuinness had no knowledge of that document prior to that conference call? Is this accurate?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It is absolutely accurate. I had no knowledge of it whatsoever. The document was sent by Peter Robinson's principal private secretary to Dublin, which was extraordinary given that it is a joint office. From our perspective, we would have required my principal private secretary to be involved in a discussion with Peter Robinson's principal private secretary and a decision then made as to whether we needed to speak to the Departmental Solicitor's Office, bring in economists and so forth, but it never happened. What happened was that Peter Robinson's principal private secretary, on his own bat and obviously on instructions from Mr. Robinson, sent that communication to Dublin. It had no assent from me, my principal private secretary or anybody in my private office. I think the Deputy said that I said that Dara O'Hagan's assessment of this was that it was not important.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I could be corrected. We can check the record. It is probably not significant but I think Mr. McGuinness said that it was not significant enough to be brought to his attention.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The main point I made was that I had enough trust in Dara O'Hagan's ability to take a decision that I should not be associated with the communication that was sent to Dublin.

Deputy Alan Farrell

I suppose this goes to the core of the slight difficulty I have with Mr. McGuinness's assertions in his statement and the comments he made previously in Northern Ireland. The idea that something as critical as this would be given to a person with vast experience in a political party such as Mr. McGuinness's party, which is well known for being rather precise in its communication methods, who would not disseminate the information contained in the memorandum of understanding or any other-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

First of all, the Deputy must remember that the work in which we engage in the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister is totally confidential.

Deputy Alan Farrell

Sure.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It would be absolutely inappropriate for Dara O'Hagan to have spoken to any other member of Sinn Féin who was not an adviser or associated with the Department, so that did not happen.

Deputy Alan Farrell

The only other question I have concerns Peter Robinson. I appreciate the difficulties he has. I think it is unfortunate that he has not submitted to the Committee of Public Accounts purely to put his point across.

We want to hear from him. We have invited him to attend the committee. I accept he claims he did not get the invitation but he is certainly aware of it now. There will be no grilling down here. We are not a courtroom. All we want is information.

Mr. McGuinness and others have made assertions about the knowledge the former First Minister's office had on this process. It would be useful for him to attend to answer questions or at least make a full statement on the matter. As I said, I have a difficulty with the unwillingness of the former First Minister to attend on the basis that it is transpiring here in Dublin. To me, this just does not stack up because we are talking about Northern Irish taxpayers as well. For many years, they were at the core of his operation as a politician. I am sure Mr. McGuinness will agree.

As deputy First Minister for many years, will Mr. McGuinness convey to Arlene Foster and other members of the DUP the importance of Mr. Peter Robinson attending this committee? I know we would facilitate him and that the Chairman would engage directly if some positive inclination to attend would come forward. Will Mr. McGuinness do that please?

In his opening statement, Mr. McGuinness suggested a lot of money was lost to the taxpayer here. This may or may not be the case. He said we all look at this with the benefit of hindsight. However, when one does it through financial eyes, one sees it is highly likely that a significant sum of money would have been lost over and above that which was lost when this portfolio was sold. In his office's dealings with NAMA, its Northern Ireland advisory committee and other individuals, Mr. McGuinness expressed a preference previously for a certain purchaser of the portfolio, which unfortunately fell through. Without putting him on the spot, how would he have done it differently, in the sense of the transaction having a greater benefit to Northern Ireland taxpayers, over and above the deal that was done?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Our concern, outside of my personal concern from the beginning, was the very real prospect of the Northern portfolio ending up, for want of a better word, in the wrong hands. There could have been a fire sale which could have had a dramatic impact on our economic situation in the North. From my perspective, whenever we have dealt with this situation in the way we have, all I can do is express my total dissatisfaction with how it was handled. Quite clearly, if we had been as involved in the process as others were, we would have been more able to have come to our own conclusions about all of that.

Regarding the issues raised by the committee that money was lost, I am not making the allegations. I am quoting an allegation made by Deputy Mick Wallace. I am not going to get involved in the debate between the Comptroller and Auditor General and NAMA. I read The Irish Times and watch RTE, so I am as well tuned into all of that as anybody around this table. That is a matter for them and they will have to work that out. The Committee of Public Accounts will have to make its own decision.

From my perspective, my concern centres around the fact that there was a process which was going to impact on the taxpayer in the South as well as impacting on our economic circumstances in the North through the prospect that there would be a fire sale. Looking at the note of the conference call between Peter Robinson, me and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, it can be seen that I was very circumspect during the course of the meeting due to the fact that I had not been involved in conversations that I knew had to be going on in the background but of which I was not being made aware. The phone call was one I approached with caution due to a lack of knowledge. It is not due to any concern about Michael Noonan being involved in wrongdoing or even Peter Robinson being involved in wrongdoing or even Frank Cushnahan or others. It was just from the perspective of not having the knowledge. Never at that stage did I cast any aspersions on anybody on that and certainly not on Michael Noonan. I have my own views about what was happening in the North. I would be an idiot if I did not have a view that PIMCO was saying people demanded £16 million from it. That is a massive amount. What is that all about? Then there is the money that ended up in the Isle of Man as a result of the Cerberus deal.

Deputy Alan Farrell

That is beyond our scope.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

There was another disadvantage I had. Two significant meetings happened during the course of all that. It is quite clear from the PIMCO note to this committee last week that Peter Robinson, with others, met PIMCO.

Chairman

We must-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It is important to state this. I knew nothing about that. I was not made aware of any of that. Even more important, on 25 March, Peter Robinson met Cerberus. An hour and a half later, he and I were at a job announcement in west Belfast. He never mentioned to me that the former Vice President of the United States, Dan Quayle, had met him earlier that morning. If people do not think that is unusual or if people do not think that is trying to exclude me from the process, then-----

Deputy Alan Farrell

It goes to the whole basis of the requirement to have Mr. Peter Robinson before the committee.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----it is quite clear to me.

Chairman

Before I call Deputy Marc MacSharry, I want to clarify that the letter of invitation to Peter Robinson was issued to the office of the Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, for onward transmission several weeks ago. We understand that, in recent days, he said he had not received it. We couriered an invitation to his home address yesterday. This morning, his office rang separately - it probably had not received it - to contact us to give us his home address in order that we could send it. That has all been done and he made contact this morning.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I welcome the deputy First Minister and thank him for taking time out of his busy schedule to be here with us and for the courtesy of attending.

He mentioned in his opening statement that the Executive would have been aware and supportive of the intention to appoint Northern Ireland advisers in the context of NAMA's undertaking. For the record, can Mr. McGuinness give his knowledge who he felt would be appointing those advisers? Did he expect to have input into that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No, the advisers, Brian Rowntree and Frank Cushnahan, were put forward by the then Department of Finance and Personnel but were actually appointed by NAMA. My understanding is that it was NAMA which appointed them on the recommendation of Sammy Wilson as Minister of Finance.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

With the joint decision-making structures in place, did those names cross Mr. McGuinness's desk?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Was Mr. McGuinness oblivious, therefore, to the fact of who might be recommended by the Minister, Sammy Wilson?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

To be quite honest, I would not have had any difficulty at that time because I had no cause for suspicion that there was any problem whatsoever with the people who were appointed at that stage.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Going back to the beginning of NAMA and its operations, Mr. McGuinness would have been aware that it had connections and properties in the North. Was there a view in the Executive that the approach taken by NAMA in the South, as it was developing in carrying out its work under the NAMA Acts, could be detrimental to the economy in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

During the course of what was a fairly lengthy process - as many people here know there would have been meetings of the North-South Ministerial Council, which would have been attended by most of our Ministers and nearly all of the Ministers from the South - and the conversations that took place, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, appreciated the concern that there was in the North in respect of the prospect of a fire sale. He was very reassuring from our perspective in the context of recognising concerns that we had expressed. That was the only forum at which there was a discussion on the part of the Executive around the issue of NAMA. Nothing to do with NAMA and the process that was undertaken, dealing with the detail of what we now know, came to the Executive from the Finance Minister.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Were members of parties such as Sinn Féin and the DUP or other parties contacted by constituents in the North, people who were developers or who had connections in the North?. Was there a view emanating from the ground up to the Executive that the orderly extraction of the interests or the involvement of Northern Ireland connections, as NAMA described them, from the process in the South was a desirable objective?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I would not have any doubt whatsoever that the business community in the North, particularly those members of it who were going to be affected by this, were undoubtedly raising concerns at constituency level with all sorts of elected representatives. At the same time, at that early stage it was quite obvious that we were dealing with the Minister, Deputy Noonan, who was very appreciative of the difficulties in the North and that the prospect of a fire sale could lead to detrimental economic damage to us, as an institution. From that perspective, obviously people were very interested. This was a huge issue that had a very dramatic impact on the business community, but all of that was prior to the sale of Project Eagle and at that stage the Minister did everything in his power to reassure the Northern Executive that he was going to be very sensible about how this would be handled, given that he was also dealing with an organisation, namely, NAMA, which was independent but at the same time we were all very conscious that on such a serious matter there would have been regular discussions between Frank Daly and the Minister.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

On the Sinn Féin side of the Executive, were there representations through Mr. McGuinness’s constituency office or those of other members in the North asking him, as deputy First Minister, to get them out of the NAMA situation because there were disposals going on in the South and they were afraid of a fire sale and that they might not be adequately treated and that could have an impact on the Northern Ireland economy? Was that issue arising? Did Mr. McGuinness have a sense that there was a view that something needed to be done?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That was in the ether. That was all over the business pages of the Belfast Telegraph and the Irish News. That was a public debate that was happening. It was absolutely unavoidable.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

So, in terms of the Executive, notwithstanding the exclusion of members from various meetings, telephone calls and processes, was there an underlying sense that something had to be done for the Northern-based connections of NAMA to try and in some way manage that process to get the best outcome for the economy of the North?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

There was a deep appreciation within the Executive about what we were facing as a result of NAMA and the impact all of that was having on the business community in the North and that there needed to be a solution which met the needs of everybody. I was working on the basis that the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, and NAMA, as an organisation established by the Irish Government, would be hugely sensitive and protective of taxpayers’ money in the South but also that they would be very conscious of the responsibilities we, as an Executive, had in the North to ensure that the outworking of the sales process did not damage an institution that was in many ways a fledgling one given that the DUP and Sinn Féin in government together with others was a very tricky act of management for all of us.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Was there any discussion or commentary at the joint ministerial council to the effect that the Executive was looking at the way disposals were being handled in the South and that it did not want that to happen in the North? Was there any comparison made in terms of saying that the Executive wanted things to go a particular way in the North and that if what was happening in the South were to be replicated up there, it would not be good for it and that there were concerns in that regard? Was there any such talk?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

During the course of any of the North-South Ministerial Council meetings, there was never any reference or criticism whatsoever from anybody in respect of what was happening in the South. The sole interest of the Ministers who were there from the North was to impress upon the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, the belief we had that this needed to be handled very sensibly, consistent with ensuring that we would not see a collapse of our economic fortunes.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Given what has transpired, from the perspective of the Office of the deputy First Minister - notwithstanding the outcome or without prejudice to the various investigations that are taking place - does Mr. McGuinness feel that the outcome, in terms of the purchase by Cerberus and how they have worked out with those connections and, ultimately, the anecdotal evidence, on which I stand to be corrected, that the 50 to 55 connections that were within NAMA and that are Northern Ireland-based have exited that process and done their particular deals, was correct. Is he of the view that said outcome benefits the economy in the North the best, leaving aside its impact just for this answer on the taxpayers in the South?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do have a concern about taxpayers’ money in the South.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I know Mr. McGuinness does, as do I, and that is why we are all here. However, I am asking him, notwithstanding the dual nature of the Sinn Féin Party in terms of operating either side of the Border, if he can compartmentalise his answer and say that the sale of Project Eagle and the ultimate outcome - notwithstanding processes and investigations - in terms of the economy of the North, that it worked out very well, that the connections are happy, that the properties are up and running, and that the economy has not been affected by a fire sale? Leaving aside taxpayers in the South for now, is that a fair assessment?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I think it is fair to say we have not been affected by a fire sale but, at the same time, in the course of my initial contribution I made it clear that I corresponded with Arlene Foster, who was then serving as Finance Minister, last year and I raised concerns from quite a number of people as to how Cerberus was dealing with some companies. The term "roughshod" was used to characterise Cerberus's treatment of some of those companies. The straight answer to the question is that our economic prospects have not collapsed. We have, very luckily over the course of the past two years, been steadily reducing the rate of unemployment, which stands today at something like 5.6%. As a result of the management of the Executive, assisted by foreign direct investment and also support for our own indigenous businesses, we have managed to come through what has been a very difficult economic period. I say that against the backdrop of the health warning that we are dealing with a very right-wing Tory administration in London, which has now imposed further pressure on us as a result of Brexit.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Finally, could Mr. McGuinness answer "Yes" or "No" as to whether the outcome has been good for the economy in the North?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

What I would say is that we have not seen the fire sale that was anticipated and that is what we were trying to prevent. At the same time, I have registered my concern about how Cerberus deals with people in what many people think is a roughshod manner. I registered that concern with the Finance Minister who then undertook to ensure that would not happen.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Is Mr. McGuinness aware of the anecdotal evidence I suggested to the effect that all of the original connections or borrowers have now done deals with Cerberus and are gone on their merry way, so to speak?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I cannot put my hand on my heart and say that they have all concluded their negotiations but I have no doubt that they are all very much involved in a negotiating process.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I am under a bit of time pressure so I want to get to the memorandum of understanding, with which my colleague has dealt. I do not want to focus too much on the aspect with which he dealt. Now that Mr. McGuinness is aware of what is in the memorandum of understanding, does he have concerns that a Government in the North was advocating terms and conditions that may have been against European law on public tenders and so on? For example, section 5 of the memorandum of understanding seeks that the third party, which would ultimately be the purchaser, "at all times on a preferred basis in respect of any underlying assets", when enlisting professionals or if it needed to procure any materials, professional services, non-professional services or construction services, should use supply chains from the North. Does Mr. McGuinness have a view on that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Suffice to say that Dara O'Hagan, who is widely experienced on these matters, had enough concern about the entirety of the memorandum of understanding that we should not assent to it, and we did not.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Initially, when Ms O'Hagan got the memorandum of understanding, would she not have thought it was potentially explosive in that, arguably, one half of the Government in the North was seeking to pervert the course of European law? Would she not have brought that to Mr. McGuinness's attention?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I will not make any derogatory comments about our partners in government. We have our own view about economics and how we should go forward; they have their view. It is quite obvious from Ms O'Hagan's assessment of the memorandum of understanding that it did not fit neatly with where I as deputy First Minister and the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister sat.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

In Mr McGuinness's own investigations, in listening and briefing himself - and he said he is as aware as anyone around this table of events to do with all these issues now - would he have any reason to believe that the Minister, Deputy Noonan, would have been aware or made aware of the memorandum of understanding?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

My understanding is that the memorandum of understanding was sent to NAMA, so I do not have any knowledge about the Minister-----

Deputy Marc MacSharry

In advance of the sale?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

Was the memorandum of understanding sent to NAMA in advance of the sale?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy should remember that the purpose of the conference call that we had with the Minister was to brief us that NAMA was going to put Project Eagle on the market. My understanding is that the MOU that was sent was sent three days later.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

This is an important point. The memorandum of understanding states these things that we can all read out and it possibly should be made available on the website, in particular the part to which I referred, with which I would have a personal concern and which would be contrary to European law on tenders. There are other issues with it. To the best of Mr. McGuinness's knowledge, would that information have been with NAMA and its officials within three days of the conference call? Is that the case?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

My understanding is that the supposed MOU, which was not worth the paper it was written on-----

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I appreciate that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----was sent three days after the conference call.

Deputy Marc MacSharry

I appreciate that Mr. McGuinness is saying that he did not approve it, and we will take that as said for now, but is his view and his information that this document was in the hands of NAMA within three days of the conference call between him, the Minister, Deputy Noonan, and the then First Minister, Mr. Robinson. Is that the case?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That is my understanding. I am open to correction. I hope I am not wrong, but I think I am right.

Chairman

We want to move on. We are down to ten-minute slots for all subsequent speakers.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I will be brief. I welcome the deputy First Minister and Mr. Mullan. On my initial reading of Mr. McGuinness's statement, it struck me that his was a very hands-off approach. It is like a parallel with his hands-off approach to the sale of Project Eagle. I find that very incongruent with the role of the deputy First Minister. With respect to Sinn Féin, among all the titles that are given to the role of deputy First Minister, in which I am interested, is joint First Minister with Mr. Robinson. However, this statement takes a very hands-off approach. I appreciate the difficulties that Mr. McGuinness has had with the DUP and the acrimony that is there, but the gap between the first paragraph in his opening statement and the second one struck me very strongly. It is a case of his stating that this was nothing to do with him, and throughout the statement he states that it was not his responsibility. There is an element of cherry-picking in this regard. On the one hand, he says he knew there were conversations going on and on the other hand, he did not seem to think that it was incumbent upon him to inform himself as to what was going on. I understand that there were biweekly meetings of the Executive and I do not understand why he did not inform himself at that stage or further question the DUP as to what was going on. I do not really accept that and I do not think it is responsible for the deputy First Minister, with respect to him, after getting a phone call on 14 January 2014, to have done absolutely nothing, as far as I can see, until 24 September 2014, when he says there was a cursory meeting with Dan Quayle and the Cerberus delegation. That is not good enough. I may not be correct but I do not think this hands-off approach helped anybody, least of all the taxpayer, and I think to put the responsibility solely on Peter Robinson is egregious and erroneous.

May I ask Mr. McGuinness-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

May I respond to that?

Deputy Josepha Madigan

Yes.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I did not say that it had nothing to with me. I said I did not have knowledge of it, which is markedly different, and the reason I did not have the knowledge is that it was quite clear that the DUP was playing this very close to its chest.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

If Mr. McGuinness says that, why did he not ask questions?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy needs to understand the workings of the institutions in the North. The Department that was in the lead regarding all of this was the Department of Finance and Personnel. Sammy Wilson was the Minister of the Department. Sammy Wilson was one of many within the DUP who led the charge against the peace building and conflict resolution centre at Maze-Long Kesh. Sammy Wilson, with others, put pressure on Peter Robinson, who was in favour of the project, to turn him against the project.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

May I-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The relationships between us and certain Ministers in the DUP at that stage, in my opinion, were appallingly bad.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I totally appreciate that and I understand that political relationships can be very fractious and difficult. However, I wish to bring Mr. McGuinness back to the conference call. When one looks at the statement in simplistic terms, it is quite stark that nothing was done. Mr. McGuinness is saying to me that it was something to do with him, but what did he do to have any oversight as to what was going on regarding the sale? The sale was on 3 April 2014. Even in the interim period, between 14 January 2014 and 3 April 2014, I cannot see in his statement what he did about it or where he made inquiries about what was happening with Project Eagle.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was informed by Peter Robinson after that that PIMCO had pulled out. I was not given-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

Mr. McGuinness seems to have accepted that, so is he saying now-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

What else could I-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

-----that he did ask Peter Robinson about Project Eagle in that interim period?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Peter Robinson, being a DUP First Minister-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

He is Mr. McGuinness's joint First Minister.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----and working with a DUP Minister of Finance and Personnel, was in the lead. The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister was not in the lead. The Departments that were in the lead regarding-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I think under the Northern Ireland Act they are pretty similar.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No. The Department that was in the lead was the Department of Finance and Personnel. The Department that was in the lead in Dublin was the Department of Finance. After-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I want to clarify this in my own mind. Is Mr. McGuinness saying to me he had a conversation with Peter Robinson, subsequent to the 14 January phone call, about Project Eagle?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Peter Robinson told me that PIMCO had withdrawn its bid and that no explanation was given.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

When was that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Obviously, it was between the phone call and the entry of Cerberus into the process.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

What was the date?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I would need to find out the date. I cannot remember the exact date off the top of my head.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

Mr. McGuinness might furnish that information to the committee. I think it is pertinent.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We will get the date for the committee.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

That would be very helpful. There were various occasions when Mr. McGuinness, in his role as deputy First Minister, could have had an opportunity to inform himself. He could have availed of the fortnightly meetings to engage with the process and to establish what was going on. I would be interested to know if there were conversations between Mr. McGuinness and Peter Robinson. Perhaps we could have those documents or a record of those conversations. I really feel the hands-off approach taken here was below that which would have been expected. That is just my view.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not agree with the Deputy. She is totally wrong in my opinion. I was absolutely dependent on Peter Robinson giving me information about the state of the negotiations.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

Was Mr. McGuinness satisfied with the information that was given to him? If not, why did he not look further into it?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The information I was being given was very scant. I think everybody at this forum needs to appreciate that the benefit of hindsight is great.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I appreciate that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy has the benefit of looking at what happened at that time with hindsight. There was absolutely nothing in my head-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

We have spoken about the draft memorandum of understanding. I think Mr. McGuinness could have looked behind the latter at that stage. I think his failure to look further behind it was incongruent with the role that has been accorded to him. I think it was below par.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I understand where I am, and I understand people will take the opportunity to score points, but the Deputy is wrong.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I am not scoring points.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I think the Deputy is doing so.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

When I read the statement, I think it is stark to see the gaps in it.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not think it is stark. I think it makes it absolutely clear. I have produced evidence in respect of the fact that hugely important meetings, which involved the First Minister, with PIMCO and with Cerberus took place. I was not made aware of-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I appreciate that Mr. McGuinness-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It is quite clear that a determined effort was being made at the time on behalf of those within the DUP who were managing the then Northern Ireland Department of Finance and Personnel and the First Minister's side of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister-----

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I appreciate that Mr. McGuinness was not made aware of certain facts.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----to prevent me from getting access to that information.

Deputy Josepha Madigan

Yes. My sole point is that I feel Mr. McGuinness should have taken steps to inform himself. There were conversations and I would be interested in having those-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

How was I going to do that if people were not going to tell me?

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I am going to leave it at that. I thank Mr. McGuinness.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

How was I going to do that if people were not telling me?

Deputy Josepha Madigan

I do not think that is a good enough answer. If we all engaged in the blame game-----

Chairman

Okay. I call Deputy Peter Burke.

Deputy Peter Burke

I thank the deputy First Minister for taking the time to attend this meeting of the committee. I want to deal explicitly with facts. I am not interested in opinions in respect of Mr. McGuinness's opening statement. I want to begin by asking about the phone call or notice he said he received from the Minister for Finance in the Republic of Ireland, Deputy Noonan, of his intention to sell Project Eagle. Given that section 9 of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 provides that NAMA is totally independent of the Government, would Mr. McGuinness not agree that this statement was grossly misleading?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No, it is not. That is exactly what happened.

Deputy Peter Burke

Would Mr. McGuinness not concur that, basically, the Minister has no jurisdiction over making an operational decision within NAMA?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I absolutely understand that NAMA is regarded as independent, but what I have relayed to the committee regarding the purpose of the phone call is my understanding of what happened.

Deputy Peter Burke

With regard to how this was executed, the Minister could not ring and say "I am selling all of Project Eagle" because he does not have the authority or the jurisdiction to do that. It is very clearly laid out in the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 that NAMA is totally independent in its performance. Therefore, the Minister could not execute that. It is not in his power to sell Project Eagle.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It could well be that NAMA had indicated to him, for the purposes of relaying it to us in the North, that this was its intention.

Deputy Peter Burke

Mr. McGuinness is changing his language.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We could all-----

Deputy Peter Burke

We need to be very factual here. The Minister does not have the authority to execute what Mr. McGuinness has stated.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I absolutely understand what the Deputy is saying. I have relayed to him an accurate assessment of what was said in the phone call.

Deputy Peter Burke

Mr. McGuinness said in his opening statement that "Since then, we have all become aware that a number of other meetings and engagements took place involving various combinations of the Minister, Deputy Noonan, Northern Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, Ministers and representatives of NAMA, Cerberus and PIMCO". Does he not think that line is grossly misleading in view of the fact that the Minister did not meet Cerberus or PIMCO?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I did not say he met them.

Deputy Peter Burke

Mr. McGuinness is clouding the issue.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was talking about "various combinations".

Deputy Peter Burke

Yes, but we need to give an objective view. We have seen how Mr. McGuinness analysed draft orders in his office. We have heard that from previous speakers. I find it absolutely incredible that a person of his stature would make a statement like that which I have quoted and which would imply to any objective person reading it that the Minister met Cerberus and PIMCO. I think that is very unhelpful.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

If Deputy Burke has taken that interpretation out of it, I want to make it clear that I am not making such an allegation.

Deputy Peter Burke

I think we should put that on the record very clearly.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not have a difficulty with that, not at all.

Deputy Peter Burke

Mr. McGuinness's opening statement did.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The reality is that the Minister for Finance was meeting members of the DUP and I was not involved in that. There was-----

Deputy Peter Burke

He was not meeting Cerberus or PIMCO and that is exactly the implication that is given in the paragraph of Mr. McGuinness's opening statement from which I have quoted.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That is Deputy Burke's interpretation of it.

Deputy Peter Burke

It is very clear.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not believe-----

Deputy Peter Burke

Mr. McGuinness said it very clearly there.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not believe it is a correct interpretation. If, however, it is the Deputy's interpretation, I am quite happy to make it clear during the course of this conversation that I am not making any assertion whatsoever that the Minister, Deputy Noonan, was involved in direct meetings with Cerberus or PIMCO.

Deputy Peter Burke

A Chathaoirligh, I think it is very important-----

Chairman

That is stated now.

Deputy Peter Burke

-----that we deal in facts.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No, we have dealt with this.

Deputy Peter Burke

That is very clearly-----

Chairman

That is stated.

Deputy Peter Burke

The next point I want to make relates to a phone call in which Mr. McGuinness essentially sang dumb in the room.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do not think I did sing dumb in the room.

Deputy Peter Burke

Let me finish, please.

Chairman

I remind Deputy Burke to be careful with his phraseology.

Deputy Peter Burke

Let me finish. This was a major sale because it involved 56 debtor connections and 900 properties in Northern Ireland. Mr. McGuinness was in the room but he made no contribution. He is giving various excuses along the road. Why did he not say anything? Did he not question the basis for this strategy, which had huge implications for Northern Ireland, at any time? He never made any contribution.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy is wrong. I made a contribution but it is not recorded in the note.

Deputy Peter Burke

Does Mr. McGuinness disagree with the note?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I also-----

Deputy Peter Burke

Does Mr. McGuinness disagree with the minute?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It is not a complete note.

Deputy Peter Burke

Essentially, what contribution did Mr. McGuinness make? Could he help the committee by setting that out?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I made the point, as I made consistently from the very beginning, that my concern was the prospect that the Project Eagle portfolio would find its way into the hands of people who would conduct a fire sale that would be hugely damaging to our economy in the North. I said that during the course of the meeting. It is not recorded in the note. I am not exercised about that because, as I said earlier during this conversation, I approached that phone call with the purpose of being more in listening mode about what was happening. It was obvious to me, because the DUP was in lead with regard to the then Northern Ireland Department of Finance and Personnel - and in light of the DUP's relationship with Peter Robinson - that meetings were being conducted and conversations were being had that I was not part of.

Deputy Peter Burke

To be fair, I do not want to hear Mr. McGuinness's opinion on issues around it. I want to be very factual. Mr. McGuinness is telling me he made a contribution and he questioned the strategy surrounding this, but that was not recorded in the minute that was taken. Is that what he is telling me? He is actually disagreeing with what is in the minute. Is that what he is saying?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I am disagreeing with what is in the minute, yes. It is not a complete minute. What is more, I do not get the Deputy when he says that he is not interested in my opinion. What is the purpose of me being here if I do not have an entitlement to express my opinion?

Deputy Peter Burke

We want to detail the facts that are set out.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Peter Burke

I think it is very important for this committee to detail the facts, rather than someone's interpretation or opinion surrounding those facts. As a committee, we have to be very factual. Obviously, we are dealing with a sale that had implications in a different jurisdiction, as Mr. McGuinness has outlined. Any objective person who sits down and reads Mr. McGuinness's opening statement will consider it an incredible interpretation.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

If we are going to deal with facts-----

Chairman

In what sense?

Deputy Peter Burke

In terms of the implications and the very line that implies the Minister had various combinations of meetings.

Chairman

That has been corrected now.

Deputy Peter Burke

It is very important to correct that. It was also implied that the Minister acted outside his jurisdiction in terms of executing a sale. Those are two major issues.

Chairman

Members of this committee know it had no role in the matter.

Deputy Peter Burke

It is very important to make those points.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Since we are dealing with facts, it seems that nobody around this table has, thus far, been exercised by the facts that Mr. Peter Robinson, as First Minister, and others within the DUP met PIMCO with Frank Cushnahan and that I was not there.

Deputy Peter Burke

We have issued an invitation-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy needs to let me finish. Further to that, on 23 March, before the sale to Cerberus, a further meeting took place that Mr. Peter Robinson attended with the former Vice President of the United States, and I was not there. If the committee is not exercised about the fact, it presents a problem.

Deputy Peter Burke

We will assess that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Further to that, in the aftermath of the sale of Project Eagle to Cerberus — members may check this out because it is on the public record — Mr. Peter Robinson issued a statement welcoming the sale. There was no statement from the offices of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. Mr. Peter Robinson, on his own bat, was flying solo with the Department of Finance and Personnel to the exclusion of Sinn Féin.

Deputy Peter Burke

The deputy First Minister is at pains to point that out but factually, in terms of executing the functions of his office, his having sat dumb in a room listening to a conversation that had such implications regarding a number of properties and their value is extraordinary. I have no further questions.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I, too, welcome the deputy First Minister and thank him for taking some time out of his obviously very busy schedule. Some 50% of the actual properties to which loans were attached were located in Northern Ireland but the common denominator was that the loans were all Northern Ireland owned. We heard from Mr. Ellingham of NAMA that the Northern Ireland portfolio was the most difficult of all the agency's portfolios. There was a great degree of non-co-operation. He went so far as to say – I am paraphrasing – that there seems to have been a preference for working with a vulture fund rather than the southern entities. Could there have been a strategy behind that based on the view that non-co-operation might have resulted in a better outcome? Would Mr. McGuinness care to comment on that because, when the comment was made, it jumped out at us?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

From our perspective, given the scale of what was happening, it was hard to contemplate how many entities would have been interested in taking on such a substantial portfolio. It was not decided by the Northern Executive but principally by NAMA that the portfolio was going on the public market, it was then really a matter of who was going to express an interest. Therefore, we were very much beholden to NAMA in regard to whatever decisions it made. We did not conduct the sale; it was conducted by NAMA.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

In his statement, Mr. McGuinness said it was alleged there was massive shortchanging in terms of the amount that could have been got from the sale had it been worked out in a different way. Obviously, the Northern Ireland economy was Mr. McGuinness's focus. Was any work done in the institutions or the Executive on what the value of the assets in Northern Ireland might be? It is quite difficult to figure out whether there is a fire sale if one does not know the value. Was any work done?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The reference to massive shortchanging obviously pertains to the remarks made by Deputy Mick Wallace. I am not making that allegation because I am not going to become embroiled with the Comptroller and Auditor General. There has been much controversy over NAMA in the course of recent months. It is a matter for the committee to deliberate on in the time ahead.

With regard to how we saw the situation in the North, our concern was centred on ensuring our economic prospects would not take a hammering as a result of whatever sale would take place. All along, I was working on the basis that the key players in the decision-making process were NAMA and the Department of Finance. I know the concerns that have been expressed about the independence of NAMA but I am around long enough to know that bodies are independent but do have their conversations with the Department on key decisions made.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

There are two other sets of questions I wish to ask, one being on why there was a deviation from the kind of process that had occurred previously. Essentially, there was a bundling of loans. One of the reasons that was advanced was that there were political considerations that would have meant it was better to bundle and sell quickly. Some of that was in regard to the non-co-operation. When it became public, in an article in The Irish Times, I believe, that PIMCO was no longer involved, the intention was to proceed with the sale because there was concern over the political implications. Does Mr. McGuinness agree with this? Does he believe it would have been possible to go back to the drawing board and work through this process without political instability?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In the Deputy's first question, she referenced the Executive. At no stage was the Executive involved in the detail of any of this. The only real conversation members of the Executive — at that stage, it was a five-party coalition — would have had was when it had its Ministers attend the meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council. During the course of such meetings, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, gives an economic assessment of where things are at regarding the southern economy. In addition, given that the NAMA situation was in the headlines at that stage, it was a case of reassuring the Ministers about our concerns over a fire sale.

The whole business of who would end up with the portfolio in the aftermath of a sales process was totally and absolutely in the hands of NAMA and, some might also think, the Government in the South, because NAMA was acting on its behalf. In reality, while various opinions may have been expressed by individual politicians in the North, or even individual political parties, at the end of the day I was working on the basis that the Irish Government and NAMA would be very cognisant of their responsibilities, not only to taxpayers in the South but also in terms of ensuring our economy in the North would not take a hammering from whatever sale would occur.

I accept that both considerations are there but when it became public that this short process was under way, would it have been destabilising to go back to the drawing board? One of the key issues is that it has been bundled and, with it being a short process, it could have meant that less money was received? Would this have been a destabilising force within the property sector in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I find it hard to speculate on what would have happened had people gone back to the drawing board, or to say whether it would have had a marked difference on what transpired at the end when Cerberus bought the portfolio. It brings me into the territory of whether I agree with NAMA or the Comptroller and Auditor General and I am not going to get into that row.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am interested in establishing fact and I am interested in establishing the opinion of Mr. McGuinness on a number issues. Deputy Peter Burke raised the issue of the phone call and this is new information to us. There is a contribution from Mr. McGuinness in this phone call that is not recorded in the minute. Was he not concerned that it was not recorded? Can he send this committee an addendum with what he felt his contribution was, so that we can have a full knowledge of the whole conversation? Was Mr. McGuinness or his team not concerned that the minute did not reflect his role in the conversation?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I will agree to do that - I do not have any difficulty whatsoever in doing so. I felt it was an omission on their part and I was not too exercised about it at the time.

Deputy Alan Kelly

And with hindsight?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was more interested in the fact that the minute suddenly appeared, in the aftermath of my going to the committee in the North. There were questions in my head about the veracity of the minute.

Deputy Alan Kelly

We are now giving Mr. McGuinness an opportunity to put an addendum on the record that will disclose his contribution.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I will do that.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Returning to the deal that subsequently went through, either Northern Ireland was going to gain or the Republic of Ireland was going to lose. Does Mr. McGuinness believe that, given the outcome, in order for the Northern Ireland economy to be protected, the Republic of Ireland taxpayer had to lose?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy is bringing me into the controversy.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not, I am just asking for Mr. McGuinness's opinion.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

My opinion is that I should not become embroiled in the controversy, which is one between the Comptroller and Auditor General and NAMA.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I will come at it from another angle.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

You are beginning to sound like Jeremy Paxman.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not at that level yet. Mr. McGuinness has been always perceived as a hands-on person. He has outlined the political dynamic of the time and the argument he had with the First Minister on the peace conference and other things. That is the context and we welcome that as it is not something of which we would have been aware. There are always dynamics in politics - believe me, I have been there and one is always fighting with colleagues. Having said that, it is still relevant and Mr. McGuinness has been always a hands-on type of person. Mr. McGuinness said he had not been made aware of the document and would not sign up to it. I find it incredible that his adviser did not make him aware of it as this is a very serious document. The fact that he was not made aware of it, which I accept, poses more questions than answers. It raises questions on the siloing in Northern Irish politics, where it would have been more politically acceptable for the Sinn Féin side of the Administration to allow the DUP side to deal with the issues relating to NAMA's property sales, thus keeping their own hands away from it on account of how potentially toxic it was. Why was he not made aware of this document?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was because my very experienced adviser, Dr. Dara O'Hagan, was of a view that the document had no validity whatsoever. It was not endorsed by the office of the First Minister, the deputy First Minister or the Executive. For such a document to have had any credibility it would have had to go through the office, which is a joint office, but it did not do that. It would also have to be brought to the Executive for its support.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Has Mr. McGuinness read the document?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Of course. Everybody has read the document.

Deputy Alan Kelly

If this, or a version of it, went through, would it be legal?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Dr. Dara O'Hagan decided that we should not have sent the document.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I did not ask that. I asked if Mr. McGuinness thinks it would have been legal.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I am not a lawyer. I do not know.

Deputy Alan Kelly

There are fundamental issues relating to commitments to using Northern Ireland contractors, tendering and other things and I am shocked that this was not brought to Mr. McGuinness's attention. I am also shocked that a senior, experienced and well-qualified adviser would not have said that something must have been happening, given the request for all personal guarantees and security to be wiped out. Would that not have set off alarm bells within Mr. McGuinness's office?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It obviously brought my adviser to the conclusion that we should not assent to it. Had a formal submission been received from the Department of Finance it would have been subjected to detailed scrutiny by departmental officials and economists. It would have been assessed and legal advice would have been sought from the departmental solicitor's office and, if necessary, from the Attorney General. The MOU sent to NAMA did not represent the Executive's position, had never been formally submitted or considered and was not an OFMDFM document because it did not have the required joint approval.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I accept that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

There was an assertion about me and Sinn Féin.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I was referring to Mr. McGuinness's office and his advisers.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy also suggested that Sinn Féin might not want its hands on the toxic transaction.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Mr. McGuinness does represent Sinn Féin.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In the Office of First Minister and deputy First Minister I am a Sinn Féin Minister but first and foremost I am very aware of my responsibilities in a joint office. The important point the Deputy is missing, and to repeat what I said earlier, and I am surprised that nobody during the course of this conversation has-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

To be fair, I have only a certain amount of time.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I will finish in five or ten seconds. Nobody has mentioned or accepted that I was excluded from the PIMCO meeting and the meeting with Dan Quayle. That proves my point.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not speaking on behalf of the committee but I accept that and have moved on so Mr. McGuinness does not need to say it another three or four times to everyone else on the committee. I think we accept that he was not at those meetings.

The point we are driving at is whether there was almost a wishful ignorance about what was happening because that is what is coming across today. That is what I am concerned about. Mr. McGuinness is a very hands-on type of person, in fact, let us be frank, he comes from a very hands-on type of political organisation. The idea that he was not pushing his way in to get information on what was going on is not credible to me. It does not stand up. Mr. McGuinness has repeated here that we are not asking why he was not involved in those meetings. We understand that. However, the information provided to us through various means, particularly through this document, and Mr. McGuinness was involved in an earlier telephone call which when he was subsequently asked he says he did contribute to, points to the fact that there were various times, and the political context is irrelevant because he had a job to do anyway, when there was a wilful neglect almost, or avoidance of asking questions about the topic because potentially it could be difficult or indeed toxic for him. All the information seems to me to point in that direction.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I reject that and I think the Deputy is political pointscoring.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not political pointscoring.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes, the Deputy is.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is the other way around.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The Deputy is grandstanding for the TV cameras.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Mr. McGuinness has made an allegation now and while I thank him for coming here, from my perspective he has come with the opposite agenda to the one he told me. It is for him to do the pointscoring to absolve Sinn Féin of any role in this. The fact that he says he was not involved in various meetings or conversations is not the issue. The issue is why he did not get involved and ask questions. That is my real issue.

Given the line that Mr. McGuinness has taken on this to date, is he telling us, and he has referred to the Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, on numerous occasions saying it was more involved in this than the Sinn Féin side of the house, that he believes the First Minister at the time misled him?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The assertion you made in your earlier contribution was playing to the cameras.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It was not.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was political grandstanding and was making-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will Mr. McGuinness please answer my question?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----allegations-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will he please answer my question?

Chairman

The Deputy should let him answer.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

You were making allegations.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Will Mr. McGuinness please answer my question?

Chairman

Would Mr. McGuinness please talk through the Chair? It is less confrontational.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Through the Chair, it is my opinion that the Deputy was playing to the gallery, to the TV cameras and making an assertion about me as a leading member of Sinn Féin-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

I know nothing about that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----that I was not interested in becoming involved-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

This is incredible.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----in the Project Eagle sale because it was toxic for Sinn Féin. That is total and absolute rubbish. In regard to Peter Robinson, how people cannot come to the conclusion that his attendance at a meeting with PIMCO and at a meeting with the former Vice President of the United States of America, without my presence, without any paper trail whatsoever back to my Department-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

Through the Chair, I just want to redirect that-----

Chairman

Let him finish.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

-----or my senior officials. Peter Robinson said during the course of his contribution on all this that there was a paper trail. I challenged him to produce the paper trail. He has not produced anything.

Deputy Alan Kelly

Would Mr. McGuinness officially answer my question: does he believe that the First Minister at the time misled him?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I believe the First Minister was part of-----

Deputy Alan Kelly

"Yes" or "No".

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I believe he was part of excluding me from important meetings with PIMCO.

Deputy Alan Kelly

It is a simple question. It is a "Yes" or "No" answer.

Chairman

The Deputy has got a straight answer.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

He is looking for a headline.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I am not looking for a headline.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

He is.

Deputy Alan Kelly

He either misled Mr. McGuinness or he did not.

Chairman

I have to stop this here because the gentleman he refers to is not in the room and he wants an allegation made against him. I am not allowing it.

Deputy Alan Kelly

I do not. I am only asking a question.

Chairman

I am not allowing that question to be put any further or even answered.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I welcome deputy First Minister, Mr. McGuinness. It is a right mouthful to say it but he is very welcome. I am not here to pointscore, to be political or to refer to Sinn Féin. I am here because we have a Comptroller and Auditor General’s report. I thank Mr. McGuinness for coming here and facing us. In his presentation he said that at the heart of this issue are the allegations made by Deputy Wallace but that is not actually correct for today. We are here because of concerns raised in this report, not allegations, concerns, factually set out. If Mr. McGuinness can be of assistance in regard to that it would be very helpful, if not, so be it. In that report there are five chapters and I have asked every single witness have they read the report.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes, I have. I cannot say that I remember all of it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

The witness does not have to remember it but he has read it and knows the substance of what is at issue. There are only two chapters raising concerns about him, dealing with the management of conflicts of interest and the basis for the sale which brings in the Northern Ireland Assembly. Those two aspects are very important.

Let us deal first with the most contentious but also the easiest concern for the moment: the conflict of interest and Mr. Cushnahan. Mr. McGuinness had no input whatsoever in the nomination of Mr. Cushnahan or Mr. Rowntree.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

None whatsoever.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Did it ever come up for discussion at any meeting Mr. McGuinness was ever at?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Never, all right.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The height of it was that we were informed by the Department of Finance and Personnel that it was going to nominate Brian Rowntree and Frank Cushnahan to NAMA and ultimately-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes, we know all that. Mr. McGuinness was aware that they were nominated.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

He had no concerns about them.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

At that stage none whatsoever.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

When did he have concerns about either of them or anybody in respect of a conflict of interest?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

After Deputy Wallace-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

When was that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was some time in the middle of last year in the Dáil.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness has already appeared before the hearing in Northern Ireland and given oral evidence, approximately a year ago, last September. Subsequently, he replied in a written statement to items that were outstanding is that correct?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I am not sure. I cannot remember.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am not trying to catch the witness out but that is the record of what he gave in Northern Ireland. I do not have access to that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I thought my evidence to the Finance and Personnel committee was very thorough and complete.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It may well have been and I will find it before I finish.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

There may have been additional points that we followed up on.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There is a list of witnesses and Mr. McGuinness is one. It refers to him submitting a further document answering one or two items.

My question is about the conflict of interest. Mr. McGuinness only became aware that there was an issue when Deputy Wallace raised it. Was there not an investigation in Northern Ireland about housing and a conflict of interest in respect of – I better be careful about the name-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I think the Deputy is talking about the Red Sky controversy.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Yes. Did that not throw up of a conflict of interest and that particular man?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

He was certainly involved as someone who had a very senior position in that situation but in respect of this process-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is a specific question. Did Mr. McGuinness become aware that issues were raised at that point regarding a conflict of interest about Mr. Cushnahan?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I would need to go back and look at the timing of all of that. Does the Deputy have the date of when that was?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I have. It was Report on the Northern Ireland Housing Executive: Management of Response Maintenance Contracts.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Was that after his appointment?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It certainly was. The report was embargoed until 20 March 2013. Is Mr. McGuinness aware of that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I am aware there was an investigation.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness will be aware of a very serious factual situation outlined at paragraph 37 which states: "[]his involvement was totally unethical and could and should have been avoided".

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Whatever about that, there was not any-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness is aware of that report. He is aware that was raised.

Chairman

I ask the Deputy to read the name of that report into the record so that we know it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Public Accounts Committee, Report on the Northern Ireland Housing Executive: Management of Response Maintenance Contracts. It states: "Ordered by the Public Accounts Committee to be printed 20 February 2013." That is a detailed written report. I presume Mr. McGuinness has read that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I have not read it. My party has read it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Perhaps Mr. McGuinness could go back and read it to see the issue I am raising. At that point the issue of conflict of interest was raised. I would have thought in Northern Ireland Mr. McGuinness and his colleagues would have thought, "Oh, good Lord. We'll look at that now. Is that an appropriate person to have on the Northern Ireland advisory committee?" That is a question.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I suppose it comes down to whether or not the reference to that is something that would forbid his participation in the advisory group to NAMA.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am saying to the deputy First Minister that that looks very serious to me. I appreciate we have the benefit of hindsight. At the time that was a very serious report and a very serious statement about a conflict of interest.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was long after he was nominated by Sammy Wilson.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Absolutely, but he continued to sit on the Northern Ireland advisory committee following that - I will not use the word "damning" - very serious report. He continued to sit on the Northern Ireland advisory committee up to November 2013. Mr. McGuinness was aware of that; he did not raise any issues about that or think there was something wrong here and that he should perhaps question it more. The answer is "No"; that is okay.

I will move on to a number of other questions. I want to be fair; I would not like to be sitting on the opposite side of this room before members of the committee. We do our best to be polite and stick to the facts. When representatives of NAMA have come in here, I have been extremely hard on them regarding the narrative. The deputy First Minister has done something similar. He is giving a narrative here rather than being factual. He has given opinions. I was extremely hard on the Minister, Deputy Noonan, but Mr. McGuinness is giving opinions here. All we want is for him to help us regarding the Comptroller and Auditor General's report on conflict of interest and pressure from Northern Ireland politicians. He has not done that in his opening statement. He has given what seems to me to be more of a self-serving statement. I know he will disagree with that and he should feel free to disagree.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

With respect, if the Deputy has any questions to ask me, then she should ask.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am going to ask him a question now. I have to make that comment first. I have made it to many of the witnesses and I want to be fair; Mr. McGuinness has done the exact same thing.

I asked him one very specific question. The next question is as follows. When he found out that the note of the phone call, the conference call, was not accurate, what did he do about it?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In the aftermath of all of this I have written to the Minister, Deputy Noonan.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

When did Mr. McGuinness become aware it was not accurate? It is very serious.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We only received that note in the aftermath of myself and Peter appearing at the DFP committee.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That was last year.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Afterwards, yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Sometime in late-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That note suddenly appeared after I gave evidence-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I heard that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

----- to the committee and we had our own-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We had our own view about the timing of all this.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I appreciate that and I appreciate that he only became aware of it. However, did he then write in to state this was not accurate or complete? This has already been put to him by other Deputies. If so, can we have a copy of that letter where he took them to task, rightly so if they did not record accurately what happened.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We did not take them-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

He did not.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We did not take them to task in terms of the accuracy of it because I was not exercised by the comments I had made in relation to a fire sale not being in the note.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

So, he did not write to them and say, "This is inaccurate. This is what I said. It should have been recorded."

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay; he did not do that.

Regarding contact, in his opening statement Mr. McGuinness said there was only one contact. Is that right?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Pardon.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

In his opening statement Mr. McGuinness said there was only one contact - the conference call. He said: "As deputy First Minister, my only involvement was a conference call, on 14 January 2014, with the then First Minister, Mr. Peter Robinson...".

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I also said I was involved in a meeting in September 2014-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That was afterwards.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

----- with Cerberus after the sale.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Prior to the sale, this was his only contact regarding Project Eagle.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

There was never any other contact.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Only the intermittent contact with Peter Robinson telling me it was happening or it was not happening, or that PIMCO was interested or was not interested.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I will come back to that intermittent contact, but was there any other meeting with Cerberus or PIMCO where Mr. McGuinness attended?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Never?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am asking him that specifically because representatives of Cerberus will appear before the committee shortly. It has stated it met a number of people. It named Mr. McGuinness but did not state specifically when. It stated:

As part of its due diligence into the Northern Ireland economy and ongoing liaison with the stakeholders in the jurisdiction, Cerberus has had contact (to varying extents) with a number of Northern Irish politicians, including the First Minister, Peter Robinson, the deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness [it goes on to list the Minister for Finance and so on]... These interactions involved senior Cerberus representatives, including in some instances, the Chairman, former Vice President of the United States...

Did Mr. McGuinness ever meet any representative, in any guise, from Cerberus, PIMCO or any other person or company bidding for Project Eagle?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I have already made it clear that the only meetings that I have been aware of was the meeting with PIMCO. This committee took possession of a letter from PIMCO in the course of the last couple of weeks, which clearly identified, in my view, that meetings were taking place. I was not part of those meetings.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay. So his answer is-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In the aftermath of that, there was a further meeting with Cerberus prior to the sale of Project Eagle.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Was Mr. McGuinness there?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was not at it.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Okay.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was not told about it and I have already, in my earlier testimony, said that later that day Peter Robinson and I were both at a job announcement in west Belfast, and he never even mentioned that he had met with the former Vice President of the United States. That was in September 2014. In fact I recall the Irish News actually wrote an article which said that was a secret meeting.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

There was nothing secret about it-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is okay.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

----- because I tweeted out a photograph.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Let me-----

Chairman

For the record what document is the Deputy reading from?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is in relation to 16 September 20-----

Chairman

What is the document? Is it a Committee of Public Accounts document?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is the Cerberus one to the Northern Ireland-----

Chairman

It was to the Northern Ireland committee. So the Deputy got it from its website.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We have done a trawl of all of these situations and none of our officials has turned up any meeting that I was at with either Cerberus or PIMCO, other than the meeting in September 2014.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

When I asked the question, Mr. McGuinness said, "No, I have met nobody." That is the answer to that.

Chairman

The Deputy's time has-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I am almost finished.

When did the First Minister, Peter Robinson, tell Mr. McGuinness about PIMCO? I think my colleague asked about this earlier and Mr. McGuinness said that he came back and told Mr. McGuinness that PIMCO had withdrawn. When was that? Was that recorded? What did he tell Mr. McGuinness?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I told the Deputy's colleague that I could not remember the date, but I will ascertain and try to get that date.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I find that difficult to accept.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Why?

Deputy Catherine Connolly

It is because Mr. McGuinness has come here with a prepared statement. That is crucial for us in terms of a conflict of interest and what is before us - not allegations. One of the concerns before us is of conflict of interest - a whole chapter. So what Mr. Robinson told Mr. McGuinness about PIMCO is very important. I am asking him and he does not know - he is going to check.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

What I need to check is the date and I think that is quite reasonable.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

That is fine. That is okay.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

However, I said that Peter Robinson told me that PIMCO had withdrawn its bid.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness did, and I am asking what else Mr. Robinson told him.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That was all that he told me.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Did Mr. McGuinness-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I now know that there is a massive issue about £16 million and-----

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness can see that we are under time pressure. Did Mr. Robinson tell him that there was money involved and that there was a difficulty?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. Robinson simply told Mr. McGuinness that PIMCO had withdrawn.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Pressure in the Northern Ireland background is the other chapter. NAMA told the Comptroller and Auditor General that it could not ignore the political background in Northern Ireland. Extraordinarily, the chairman or CEO of NAMA stated that it would have preferred to have dealt with a vulture fund. Was Mr. McGuinness aware of this level of hostility? Does he agree with that statement?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I was not aware of that, but let us not lose sight of the reality. The ultimate responsibility for selling Project Eagle lay with NAMA, which should only have been concerned about the money of taxpayers in the South and, from our perspective, not doing anything to damage the North's economic prospects.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

After the sale was completed, there was an extraordinary series of phone calls on the third or fourth day of the month. They set out that the former Vice President of America would phone the former First Minister and so on and asked what his number was and whether it was okay to phone him. Was Mr. McGuinness contacted?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

Mr. McGuinness was not contacted whatsoever.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Not at all.

Deputy Catherine Connolly

I thank Mr. McGuinness.

Deputy David Cullinane

I welcome the deputy First Minister to today's hearing. He will be aware that we have held many hearings and heard from many witnesses, including the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, the NAMA chairman, Mr. Frank Daly, Mr. Brian Rowntree, an external member of the NIAC, and officials from the Department of Finance. We are trying to establish the facts as the people who appear before us understand them. That is the context in which the questions are being put.

In his opening statement, Mr. McGuinness referred to a number of meetings and engagements of which he was not aware. He stated, "Since then, we have all become aware that a number of other meetings and engagements took place involving various combinations of the Minister, Deputy Noonan, Northern Democratic Unionist Party, DUP, Ministers and representatives of NAMA, Cerberus and PIMCO." He has clarified that all of those actors were not involved in all of those meetings, only in various combinations. He went on to offer a context, in that the relationships between himself and the former First Minister and between the DUP and Sinn Féin were fraught, tense and difficult for other reasons. Does Mr. McGuinness believe that this was why he was excluded from meetings and why the DUP kept this issue close to its chest? Has he given any other consideration as to why he was excluded?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No. To go onto that ground is to speculate. All that I have factually done in addressing this committee is to outline what I believe was an important context during the course of 2013 when a serious situation developed between the DUP and Sinn Féin over the DUP reneging on a significant agreement to develop the Maze-Long Kesh site, a site that could have brought 5,000 to 6,000 people into employment and resulted in the building of a conflict resolution centre. At one stage many years ago, the former First Minister described the prospect as a tourist mecca. It was a major issue between the DUP and us and it certainly soured the relationship to a large degree.

Deputy David Cullinane

I accept that-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I cannot say that that was the reason.

Chairman

For the benefit of the many people watching, what was the date or month? Mr. McGuinness mentioned something about Mr. Robinson. What was the year?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was in 2013, probably July. The letter that he then sent to DUP members found its way into the media. I was not told about it. I never got a phone call. My office was not told about it. The letter said that the DUP was not going forward with the development of the Maze-Long Kesh site as agreed with us. That was sometime in the middle of August 2013.

Chairman

PIMCO was on the scene much earlier than that and before this difficulty in the relationship began.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Chairman

Had Mr. McGuinness been excluded prior to that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

PIMCO was on the scene prior to that but the big exclusions from the meeting came after. The PIMCO meeting, which was notified to this committee a couple of weeks ago, and the Mr. Quayle meeting came afterwards.

Chairman

They were later.

Deputy David Cullinane

Mr. McGuinness has put that on the record, so we know there were tensions in respect of the Maze site and other issues. That is fine and we understand that. What I am trying to understand is, if Mr. McGuinness believed that he was locked out of important meetings to do with this loan sale under Project Eagle - which were not about the Maze - surely he would have given consideration to the question of why he had been excluded. That is just an example. Mr. McGuinness has referenced the issue a number of times. It is extraordinary that a former Vice President of the US would be in Belfast, let alone at Stormont Castle, and the deputy First Minister would not have been made aware of it. Surely Mr. McGuinness would have asked why he was being excluded from the meetings. If so, did he put questions to Mr. Robinson at any point when he was made aware? He said that he learned from the media that Mr. Quayle had been to Stormont Castle. Did he ask Mr. Robinson about why he had not been informed?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

When that incident occurred, it became clear that something else was happening and that I was being excluded, not just from the meeting with the Minister, Deputy Noonan, but also from the meeting with Mr. Quayle. I asked myself what it was all about, but the Deputy must remember that relationships were still fraught at that stage. Our difficulty was that the then Department of Finance and Personnel was in the lead.

Deputy David Cullinane

But asking oneself the question-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

We were not-----

Deputy David Cullinane

I am sorry, but asking oneself the question and asking the question of those who were excluding one are two different things. Did Mr. McGuinness put questions to anyone in the DUP, be it the then Minister for Finance and Personnel or Mr. McGuinness' colleague, the former First Minister? Mr. McGuinness asked himself a question, but did he ask those individuals about why he had been excluded?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I did not put those questions to the former First Minister at that stage because my concern was to try to understand the entire process involved in what was happening and why I had been excluded for a lengthy period. The information on this appeared in the public domain after Deputy Wallace made his statement in the Dáil. By then, it was clear to me that, at some stage, there would be a police investigation into all of this. That is why I did not enter into the conversation.

It is important to point out that the National Crime Agency, NCA, made a statement some weeks ago to the BBC. I believe that one of its members was interviewed. The NCA stated that it had interviewed more than 40 people regarding Project Eagle. I am not one of those 40 people.

Deputy David Cullinane

But the question I was asking was not about that. I appreciate that important point but, in his opening statement, Mr. McGuinness referenced a number of times - in fact, almost his entire opening statement centred around this issue - engagements and meetings of which he was not aware. We are trying to understand this from our perspective. Regardless of what might be in Mr. McGuinness' head, we are trying to establish facts. I hope that, at some point, the former First Minister might attend the committee and be able to shed some light on this as well. Only he can answer these questions, but surely Mr. McGuinness formed an opinion. Surely when he asked himself these questions, he had some sense of why he was being excluded. This was a major portfolio with an eventual sale price of £1.3 billion. Mr. McGuinness asked himself the question but I am trying to understand why it was not put to the former First Minister.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The answer is clear. The DUP was in the lead on the issue through the then Department of Finance and Personnel and by dint of the fact that the then First Minister was a member of the DUP.

I clearly came to a conclusion there was a deliberate attempt made to exclude me from it. I did not have any confidence whatever that having the type of conversation that was needed against the backdrop of the appalling relationships that existed at that time was going to lead anywhere except to a further row. The key point in all of this for me was whenever the allegations were made in the Dáil, it was quite clear to me in the aftermath of those allegations being made that we were heading to a police investigation. That is exactly what happened.

Deputy David Cullinane

The witness has clarified that. Mr. Rowntree was the second external member of the Northern Ireland advisory committee, NIAC, and was a very helpful witness for the committee. He spoke about a University of Ulster study carried out into the assets in the North. It was his view at the time that the entire NAMA strategy for the assets in the North was to work out the assets over time and this University of Ulster report was to help in that regard. Specifically, it was mainly to do with residential properties. He was asked, with him having that and other information in his possession and as an NIAC member, if this information was brought to other potential bidders or purchasers what currency it would have. He said, "I would smile if I had that document." That was his view as a member of the NIAC. He also said, by the way, he would have resigned and he would never have taken up the position in the first place had he the same conflicts of interest that have now emerged with regard to the other player.

Has the witness read the letter from PIMCO?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy David Cullinane

Mr. McGuinness understands it. Mr. Rowntree would not have been aware of this when he was here but we now know PIMCO did not make a blind approach to NAMA. It did so on the basis of discussions that took place. It was approached by a Mr. Coulter of Tughans legal firm, Brown Rudnick, and also Mr. Frank Cushnahan, who at the time was a board member of the NIAC. We know that is the case and Mr. Rowntree said that the information that Mr. Cushnahan had would have made potential bidders smile. When did Mr. McGuinness first learn of all this? When did he learn that Mr. Cushnahan was involved in a success fee arrangement or had any relationship with any of these individuals?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

It was in the aftermath of Deputy Mick Wallace's statement in the Dáil. Things unfolded fairly rapidly then and it became quite clear there was an untold story around the PIMCO withdrawal. My concern was who knew what about that. How much did NAMA know about that? Did the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, know about it? Did the then First Minister, Mr. Peter Robinson, know about it? One thing is for sure, I did not know about it.

Deputy David Cullinane

I want to bring it back to what Mr. McGuinness knew. We will speak to those individuals as they come in. Mr. McGuinness's opening statement spoke about various combinations of meetings and engagements that took place between the Minister, Deputy Noonan, Northern DUP Ministers, NAMA, Cerberus and PIMCO. We know all sorts of engagements took place and there was one conference call with which Mr. McGuinness was involved with the Minister, Deputy Noonan. My point is there were discussions between politicians in the North and others, including finance Ministers, on a range of issues. Why was there no involvement or discussion when NAMA or the Minister, Deputy Noonan, were made aware of the success fees? Has Mr. McGuinness asked why he was not made aware of that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

That is a question that needs to be answered during the course of what is now a criminal investigation. From my perspective in the North, I knew absolutely nothing about anything to do with success fees, Brown Rudnick, Mr. Ian Coulter or Mr. Frank Cushnahan. PIMCO, in its letter to this committee, mentioned the sum of something like £16 million that was demanded of it. I knew nothing about that at all. I was not told anything about that at all. I was not told anything about it by Mr. Peter Robinson, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, or anybody representing NAMA.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Fáilte arís, deputy First Minister and Mr. Mullen. I have a question for the Comptroller and Auditor General. At any point is the deputy First Minister, Mr. Martin McGuinness, referenced in the Comptroller and Auditor General's report?

Mr. Seamus McCarthy

No.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

I thank Mr. McCarthy for the clarification. What is the deputy First Minister's role in NAMA?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I have none whatever, other than attending a meeting in March 2011 with Mr. Frank Daly, Mr. Brendan McDonagh and others.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Mr. McGuinness met them on that occasion. What is his oversight role in NAMA, its operation or any of its transactions?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I have no role whatever.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Would it be fair to say the relationship between NAMA and the Executive, specifically the Offices of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, was one based essentially on political courtesy or political sensitivities?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes, that is correct.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Okay. With regard to the Ministers in the respective jurisdictions, North and South, it would be fair to say it was slightly different.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Okay. Mr. McGuinness has placed on the record that neither he nor the Executive had any involvement in the appointments of Mr. Rowntree or Mr. Cushnahan, and in any event he would not have had a concern with those individuals-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

At that stage.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Yes. The deputy First Minister has set out in some details his concerns about his exclusion by the DUP and in particular by Mr. Peter Robinson. Had he any reason to suspect anything other than - I will be polite - political awkwardness on their part? Had Mr. McGuinness at any stage any reason to suspect anything that might have been untoward or corrupt in their dealings?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I had no reason to suspect anything corrupt whatever. A key point in all of this was that in the aftermath of the deal with Cerberus, even within a day, Mr. Robinson issued a statement on his own behalf that in my opinion was about trying to take the glory of having resolved the NAMA problems for a certain number of business people in the North. That may be what drove the DUP to be so protective of this process for itself as it did not want that glory, for want of a better word, shared.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

I will just tease that out. I raise this purely because a line of thought has emerged from Deputy Kelly in terms of the toxicity of NAMA and this deal, which is one way of interpreting matters. Of course, the other line concerns the kudos that would accrue to whoever might sort out the NAMA issue. This is speculative and I will not detain the deputy First Minister too long on this. Could it have been that for the First Minister, Mr. Robinson, the idea was to keep this matter within a set of players? By the way, did Mr. Cushnahan have a role previously in the Executive?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes, he had a fairly nominal role as a member of an overseeing organisation or body that existed. I do not believe I met the people on it.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Would it be fair to say Mr. Cushnahan was fairly close to Mr. Robinson?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I think they were very close. That is my view.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Okay. That is a matter that is reflected and has been echoed by Mr. Peter Robinson.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

He was described during the course of Mr. Peter Robinson's testimony to the finance committee, along with Mr. Ian Coulter, I think, as a pillar of society.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Mr. McGuinness must have been very angry, albeit after the fact and with the benefit of hindsight, at the behaviour of the former First Minister.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Absolutely.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

He did not play ball, did he?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Absolutely. It was quite clear that in the handling of that situation that he was incredibly advantaged by the fact that the Department of Finance and Personnel was under the control of a DUP Minister.

It gave him access that I could never have imagined I would have had.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

What is the deputy First Minister's relationship like with Sammy Wilson?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I regard Sammy Wilson as someone who played a very key role in torpedoing what was a major agreement between the DUP and Sinn Féin to develop the Maze-Long Kesh site to build a peace building and conflict resolution centre and to open the prison buildings to the public, described by Peter Robinson previously as a tourist mecca.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

I appreciate that the deputy First Minister is still very sore as regards that breach of faith.

Looking at the circumstances now can I put two questions to him? Deputy Noonan is the line Minister in the Southern Administration that has responsibility for NAMA. The deputy First Minister has made it clear, and I respect his position, that he is not here to criticise Deputy Noonan. He knew about the success fees or fixers' fees. Does the deputy First Minister have a view on what the Minister, Deputy Noonan, might have done?

NAMA knew or discovered that Frank Cushnahan had relationships with debtors who accounted for 50% of the Project Eagle portfolio. Does the deputy First Minister have a view on the matter? NAMA said to us in its review that it could not have moved to remove Frank Cushnahan, in any event, because it would have caused so much trouble north of the Border. Can the deputy First Minister comment on the matter?

I hope that the deputy First Minister does not mind answering my final question. Looking back on it now, does he regret, notwithstanding the difficult relationships, that he did not demand from the DUP, and Peter Robinson in particular, a more complete picture of what was going on with the portfolio?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In relation to that, I am very strongly of the view that I would not have got the sort of answer that I would have required. Given the nature of the relationships between us at what was a very difficult time in all of this, it would have led to further damage to already very badly damaged relationships in my view. Please repeat the earlier question.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

I asked the deputy First Minister about the Minister, Deputy Noonan.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I do believe, as the Deputy has asserted, if it is true that Minister Noonan was aware of the demand for success fees of something in the region of £16 million involving Brown Rudnick, Ian Coulter and Frank Cushnahan, we should have been told about that. We were not told about it.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Does the deputy First Minister resent the fact that Minister Noonan did not tell him?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I think it was a mistake not to do so.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

What about NAMA's assertion that in any event, around Mr. Cushnahan and the management of conflicts of interest, it would not have been in a position to remove him because of the consequences north of the Border? In the view of the deputy First Minister, is that an accurate assertion ? Would it have caused a diplomatic situation?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In my opinion it would have caused a major incident with the DUP. That I know for sure. I am not going to go any further in relation to Frank Cushnahan. All of this is subject to a criminal investigation. Just to have my say on that, I do think that that investigation is taking far too long.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Why did the deputy First Minister come here today?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I came here today because I have nothing to hide and because I wanted to co-operate with the committee. I wanted to make it clear to the committee the conditions and circumstances under which I was working. These were circumstances that could have brought about the collapse of the political institutions in the North.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Does the deputy First Minister think that his performance in his office was, as a colleague has suggested, below par? Does the deputy First Minister accept that criticism?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Absolutely not. I wonder how any of the colleagues around this forum would have dealt with some of the situations I have had to deal with over the course of the last ten years.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Does the deputy First Minister think that First Minister Robinson's performance was below par?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Certainly, in relation to the issue of Maze-Long Kesh, in relation to the formation of the Loyalist council, the whole issue of flag protests, the whole issue of parades-----

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

I want to know in respect of Project Eagle.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

In respect of Project Eagle, it was quite obvious. I think it is quite obvious to people here about that.

Chairman

The debate has strayed off Project Eagle.

Deputy Mary Lou McDonald

Finally, does the deputy First Minister think that First Minister Robinson should attend this forum and co-operate?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I have done it and I think anybody that is asked to come should come.

Chairman

I call Deputy Cassells who is the final speaker and then we will close up.

Deputy Shane Cassells

I thank the deputy First Minister and Mr. Mullan for attending this afternoon.

I am hugely interested in the earlier comments made by the deputy First Minister that challenged members of the Committee of Public Accounts that they were not exercised about several facts. First, that Peter Robinson met Frank Cushnahan and PIMCO. Second, on 24 March before the sale of Cerberus a further meeting took place between Peter Robinson and former US Vice President, Mr. Dan Quayle, without the presence of the deputy First Minister. In terms of that meeting, the deputy First Minister replied to Deputy Cullinane that there was clearly something else happening. Third, the claim has been made that in the aftermath of the sale of Project Eagle to Cerberus, Peter Robinson issued a statement welcoming the sale but he flew solo with his comment. I am hugely interested and exercised by the fact that the deputy First Minister is so exercised, as it naturally leads me to ask him whether he wishes to make further comments to the Committee of Public Accounts.

I am not interested in cheap headlines. The only headlines that I am interested in are the ones featured in my local newspaper called the Meath Chronicle but it does not cover the meetings of the Committee of Public Accounts.

A couple of times I thought that the deputy First Minister was on the brink of offering more in respect of the context of the situation. He has framed a picture by virtue of his contributions but has not filled it in. Is there anything he would like to add to the three points I outlined?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

No. I think that my evidence to this committee has been as complete as I can give it. I am always conscious of my responsibilities as deputy First Minister. We now have a changed situation in the North. We have not a five-party coalition but a two-party coalition and Arlene Foster is the new First Minister. I have a duty and a responsibility to work positively and constructively with her. Our regime has been challenged greatly by what the Tories have done in relation to Brexit.

Deputy Shane Cassells

I respect that. I am not trying to get the deputy First Minister to sour relationships that are sensitive for the whole island. There are probably members of BBC Northern Ireland who are looking at what he is saying today and trying to latch on to everything that he says.

The deputy First Minister praised Deputy Mick Wallace in his statement earlier for the information that he put in the public domain. The deputy First Minister stated that he was at a remove from the process, that it was Peter Robinson and Sammy Wilson, and that he relied on them for information as well. From correspondence issued by PIMCO to this committee it is clear, according to PIMCO, that the Northern Ireland Government had a preferred bidder in PIMCO. Given the fact that Sammy Wilson apparently had a preferred bidder in mind, as did the Northern Ireland Government, and that there were bad relations between the deputy First Minister and the First Minister at the time over Long Kesh, does the deputy First Minister in hindsight believe he was sidelined not so much to do with people being at odds with him but purposely keeping him at arm's length?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

How can one come to any other conclusions whenever one is not-----

Deputy Shane Cassells

Does the deputy First Minister feel that relationships between Northern Ireland Ministers, Sammy Wilson and others that the deputy First Minister has named and cited, and meeting with those who potentially at that time could have benefitted from the sale to PIMCO, are worrying?

Chairman

Deputy, we are not going there now.

Deputy Shane Cassells

I was very clear in what I said, Chairman. I said that given the relationship and the meetings that took place between the people, Sammy Wilson and others who would have benefitted from the sale to PIMCO, as cited by the deputy First Minister, that this is worrying not just from a public transparency point of view but also for the aspect that this Committee of Public Accounts is investigating and trying to get to the heart of.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

My difficulty is that I do not have any information about the scale of the meetings that were taking place without my knowledge. They may have been much more extensive even than what I have said here.

Deputy Shane Cassells

I appreciate that. Does the deputy First Minister think it is worrying? He has cited these people, and I refer to the three points that I made at the start of my questioning, as having met these people who potentially could have benefitted from the sale, as the deputy First Minister has said, to the tune of quite considerable sums of money-----

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Yes.

Deputy Shane Cassells

It was senior people in the Northern Ireland Government who met these people and expressed a preferred bidder.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

One point I will make is that this was not the government in the North. We have an Executive.

Deputy Shane Cassells

I appreciate that but it is amazing that people do not interpret it as that, they call it the Northern Ireland government.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I understand that. I understand that people also get mixed up about the authority and powers of the First Minister and the deputy First Minister. People think that because one has the title of "First Minister" that one is the Prime Minister. I have no difficulty in appreciating that people have problems with that, but the issue is that it is quite clear that there were all sorts of meetings taking place, principally between DUP Ministers and other interested groups, including Frank Cushnahan, Ian Coulter, people who might not be at the centre of this committee’s investigation, but this is what kicked it all off and there is now a criminal investigation. Who knows where all of that will go, if it comes to a conclusion, in terms of helping this committee with fuller information in the aftermath of whatever decisions are made.

Deputy Shane Cassells

Just to delve more deeply there, Mr. McGuinness said Peter Robinson and Sammy Wilson kept closely to themselves and that at that point there was no reason for him to believe there was any wrongdoing. But given his praise for Deputy Mick Wallace, and for what Mr. McGuinness has described today as Deputy Wallace's service, and that in his closing remarks he said that what goes to the heart of this is a key couple of issues, does he believe with hindsight that there was any wrongdoing and that there was contagion there as well that possibly could have spread? What was at an embryonic stage in the North could have affected the process that was happening here as well. Mr. McGuinness did say in his closing remarks that that goes to the very heart of the key questions that should be asked here today in terms of wrongdoing illustrated by Deputy Mick Wallace and a potential loss to the taxpayer in this State as well.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Well let me answer it this way, there is a police investigation-----

Deputy Shane Cassells

I am not asking Mr. McGuinness to go beyond that.

Mr. Martin McGuinness

I will not name anybody but the police are investigating wrongdoing. Do I believe that there was wrongdoing? Yes I do.

Deputy Shane Cassells

In terms of the wrongdoing that potentially could have happened by virtue of meetings that would have taken place, as we have discussed here today, is that something that we should centre on, given the discussions that linked into that?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

The two big debating points around the whole issue of NAMA were obviously the revelations in relation to certain individuals in the North and this issue of the fees that they were demanding.

The second issue, which I think was more of a debate here in Dublin, centred around whether Project Eagle was sold for a price less than what it was worth. That is what the debate is and I have not-----

Deputy Shane Cassells

The question I am asking is where should the debate start then in terms of whether something was cooked up. That is why I asked about the possible contagion from the North to the South. There had been a request for an exclusive deal with one preferred bidder and the dots are being joined in that respect as well by virtue of what PIMCO voluntarily offered by way of its letter to the committee. Is that a fair assertion to make in terms of the potential to cook up a deal between a closed number of Northern Ireland Ministers and a preferred bidder and a link to people who could have benefitted from the sale?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

Names have been mentioned here, for example, Ian Coulter, Brown Rudnick and Frank Cushnahan. Even in the aftermath of the commencement of the investigations that are ongoing at present, some of those people were being described as pillars of our society. That raises very serious questions.

Chairman

They are for us to answer, not for the witness. I ask the Deputy to conclude as we are about to draw the meeting to a close.

Deputy David Cullinane

I wish to ask a question of the deputy First Minister for clarification purposes. When Frank Daly, the chair of NAMA, was before the committee he was questioned a number of times about why NAMA did not move sooner to remove Mr. Cushnahan from his role, he cited political sensitivities. He said:

[...] removing Mr. Cushnahan from the committee before his resignation in November 2013 would have been seen as a very significant and controversial move and one that would have caused tensions in the positive cross-Border political engagement that has served the island of Ireland so well over recent decades. Given that the removal of Mr. Cushnahan would have been presented as a slight to Northern Ireland interests, we could not have done so without being satisfied that such an action was justified.

Was that Mr. McGuinness’s view? Would he have taken that as a slight? In the context of political sensitivities and cross-Border political engagement, was that based on any conversations Mr. Daly had with Mr. McGuinness at any point?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

He never had any conversations with me, but it certainly is not something I would have been exercised about. The reference indicates that he clearly believes that other political figures would have taken serious umbrage at Frank Cushnahan being removed.

Deputy David Cullinane

The second point I wanted clarification on relates to when the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, was before the committee. He responded to questions from Deputy Alan Kelly about the change in the sale strategy from the asset base one to the loan sale one. Deputy Alan Kelly asked:

Does the Minister accept that the Executive suddenly changed tack? From being worried about a fire sale, it was suddenly the case - perhaps across the political spectrum, but certainly on behalf of a number of politicians, including the Minister of Finance, the First Minister, etc. - that the Executive was a big advocate of the process that eventually materialised. It was a big change.

The Minister said “Yes”. He went on to qualify that by saying:

The reason for the change was obvious. The Executive was nervous of a fire sale that might damage the Northern Ireland economy when there was no obvious way of selling the whole portfolio. When a major international property company emerged and approached the Northern Ireland authorities with an interest in the whole portfolio, it seemed to change the situation.

In other words, he said that when PIMCO came on the scene that changed the Executive’s mind about the approach by NAMA? Is that the interpretation of Mr. McGuinness as well?

Mr. Martin McGuinness

For a start I want to make it clear that this was never discussed by the Executive. The Executive never had a conversation about the detail of the NAMA sale of Project Eagle. This is something else which I think we all know what that relates to.

Deputy David Cullinane

I thank Mr. McGuinness.

Chairman

At this stage we have concluded our discussion. On behalf of the Committee of Public Accounts I thank the deputy First Minister for making himself available for the past few hours to meet with the committee. I also thank the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. McCarthy, and Mr. Riordan from his office for being here.

I remind members that tomorrow we will meet with former NAMA board members at 9 a.m. and with Cerberus at approximately 2.30 p.m. The latter was the successful bidder. I will suspend the meeting for a few moments so that members can meet in private to discuss business.

The witnesses withdrew.

The committee went into private session at 3 p.m. and adjourned at 3.25 p.m. until 9 a.m. on Thursday, 17 November 2016.