We are joined by the Comptroller and Auditor General, Mr. Seamus McCarthy, as the permanent witness to the committee. He is accompanied by Mr. John Riordan, deputy director of audit. Are the minutes of 10 November agreed? Agreed. I propose we hold over the opening statement of Cerberus until we meet its representative in the afternoon.
The next item of correspondence in category B, that is, correspondence from Accounting Officers and-or Ministers and follow-up to meetings. Items 154 to 163B, inclusive, 171B and 186B, all refer to late accounts. I propose we note them for now and return to them when we discuss accounts and statements shortly.
Items 168B(i) and (ii) are correspondence from Mr. Niall Cody, Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, providing a response to a series of questions from the committee following our engagement with the Revenue Commissioners in October. It is a fairly extensive reply and I thank Mr. Cody for that. Is it agreed to note and publish it? Agreed.
Items 169B(i) and (ii) is an e-mail from Ms Michelle Lowe of NAMA attaching a copy of PIMCO's offer letter to NAMA in December 2013. I propose we note and publish that, and it will be added to our Project Eagle file. Items 173B(i) and (ii) is correspondence from Dublin City Council responding to the committee's letter of 26 September on the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and contracting of professional services. A copy of a response given at a Committee of Public Accounts meeting in the last Dáil is attached. Is it agreed to note and published? Agreed.
Item 175B is an e-mail also from Mr. Martin Whelan of NAMA informing the committee that it cannot release statements of interests made by members of the board, committees and senior members of staff in accordance with section 35 of the Ethics in Public Office Act. Is it agreed to note and publish that? Agreed. I have asked the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisor to prepare a note on this.
Our committee is agreed that, outside the meetings, the secretariat can seek additional information it knows is of interest to the members. We had written to NAMA seeking a copy of any declarations of interest board members or members of the Northern Ireland committee had published. They said that, under the legislation, the documents are confidential and not subject to the ethics legislation and not for publishing. However, I was in touch since then looking for any declaration of interest signed by any member at any Northern Ireland committee meetings or board meetings in connection with Project Eagle. I want to see copies because we have been told on several occasions that some members, especially those of the Northern Ireland committee, had signed a declaration of interest. Mr. Rowntree, when he was here, said he never saw them and that they were just handed to the Chairman. I checked the legislation this morning and noted it states they are to be made available to all board members at the meeting. It is not satisfactory for it to be handed only to the Chairman. That said, the minutes of the Northern Ireland committee record the items of disclosure but they have been redacted in the set of minutes given to us. If we are considering this matter, we want to see the declarations signed by the people at the meeting. We are quite specific on the fact that we should get that. We will make clear to NAMA precisely what we are looking for.
The next item of correspondence is an e-mail from Mr. Martin Whelan of NAMA attaching a response to the information requested on 3 November. We will note and publish that. Every week, we have a letter going to NAMA seeking additional information. The replies are coming back.
Items Nos. 177B(i) and 177B(ii) concern an e-mail from Mr. Brendan Smith of the accounts branch in the Department of Social Protection attaching a copy of the Social Welfare Appeals Office annual report for 2015, as requested at our meeting with it in October. Can we agree to note and publish that? Agreed. It is not the document I was looking for, however. The document we received yesterday is a summary of the activities of the Social Welfare Appeals Office detailing the categories of appeals it dealt with. I was looking for its annual financial statement, not a summary of its hearings and activities. We will be specific in seeking a copy of its financial statement. There is other outstanding information from the Department of Social Protection that we have not received yet. I would like to receive it within the next seven days because several weeks have elapsed since it was first requested.
Nos. 178B(i) and 178B(ii) refer to an e-mail from Mr. David Meisels, head of litigation at Fortress Investment Group, attaching a letter of response on the committee's areas of interest. It is not an extensive letter but I propose to read it into the record because Fortress was the underbidder. Cerberus was the successful bidder. Some time ago, in early November, in advance of a committee meeting I asked the secretariat to write to Fortress posing specific questions. We received a reply today but since our last meeting we have agreed to invite its representatives. We have not had a response on that yet. We wrote the letter to them because I wanted to get information flowing. I have the authority to invite representatives without clearance from the committee. We have since obtained it. We still hope the representatives will come. Although the letter received is short, it deals with a couple of specific issues. Since Fortress is a key player on this issue, having been the only underbidder at the end of the competition, we should read the short response. We will not have a big discussion on it.
