Robert Troy
Question:209. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Finance the contact he has had with National Asset Management Agency regarding the sale of a company (details supplied). [13195/14]
View answerTuesday, 25 March 2014
Questions (209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 257)
Michelle Mulherin
Question:210. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Finance the reason the management buyout of a company (details supplied) did not proceed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13196/14]
View answerMichelle Mulherin
Question:211. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Finance the reason the National Asset Management Agency did not honour its notice of decision dated 27 January 2014 that it issued to the management buyout team and which confirmed that the buyout was acceptable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13197/14]
View answerMichelle Mulherin
Question:212. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Finance the conditions the National Asset Management Agency will attach to any bid for a company (details supplied) that will ensure that the jobs at that business will be protected and that their terms and conditions will remain the same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13199/14]
View answerMichelle Mulherin
Question:213. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Finance when a decision will be made as to who is the preferred bidder for a company (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13200/14]
View answer
Dara Calleary
Question:257. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Finance if his attention has been drawn to the impending sale of a company (details supplied) by a National Asset Management Agency appointed receiver; the interaction he has had with NAMA regarding this sale; if he will support the retention of the maximum numbers of jobs in the company; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13912/14]
View answerWritten answers
I propose to take Questions Nos. 209 and 213, inclusive, and 257 together.
This matter was comprehensively addressed by my colleague Minister Bruton during a discussion in the Oireachtas two weeks ago. As the Oireachtas is aware the company referred to is the subject of a court-appointed Examinership process under the supervision of the High Court and it is important that the independence of that process is respected and that nothing is said that would in any way affect the outcome of the Examinership. The Examiner will consult with creditors, potential investors and other relevant parties to devise and recommend, if possible, the most appropriate course of action in the interests of the survival of the company and will put that course of action to the court for approval. NAMA, as a creditor, is one of a number of stakeholders, which include another financial institution, the Revenue Commissioners, landlords, and trade creditors that will be required to vote on the Scheme of Arrangement devised by the Examiner. The High Court will have the final say and, until then, the company is under its protection. We must be careful to respect and to avoid any suggestion of interference in this process.
By way of update, I understand that the Examiner is currently in the process of engaging with six parties that, I understand, have expressed an interest in the business. As part of this process, the Examiner has requested proposals from each of the parties as to their plans for the business and employees of the company.
NAMA's role in relation to this company is that of a secured lender. In this position, NAMA approved the sale of the assets of the parent company, Staunton Sports, to the existing management team. This sale could not proceed however because, prior to the management team being in a position to drawdown the requisite funding from its bank, a higher unsolicited bid was indicated in writing by another party to the proposed receiver. The management team transaction was to have completed by the evening of Friday, 31 January. However, drawdown of the requisite funding had not happened by lunchtime on Saturday, 1 February at which time the new unsolicited bid was received by the proposed receiver. The facts around this have been confirmed by the management team. The proposed receiver advised that, if appointed by NAMA, he would be legally obliged to consider the new bid, since he has a statutory obligation to secure the best price reasonably obtainable for the secured assets at the time of their sale. Media reporting of the emergence of this further bid caused concern among suppliers and trade creditors, which the Directors of Staunton Sports brought to NAMA's attention. Having regard to the deteriorating condition of the business and the company's insolvent position, and based on legal advice, NAMA and the Directors of Staunton Sports decided that Examinership was an alternative option, which would permit all bids to be considered while the Company was under the protection of the High Court. NAMA is funding the company during the Examinership process, which includes funding the payment of suppliers and staff wages.
I note the statement from the Directors of the company, which acknowledges the support of NAMA in the current Examinership process and states the Board's confidence that the current process will deliver best results for all the stakeholders.