Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 21 July 2016
134. Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly asked the Minister for Finance his views on the bidding processes for loan books being sold by IBRC, NAMA or any other source, if any bidders were structured as section 110 companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23923/16]
View answer136. Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly asked the Minister for Finance the list of the purchasers of loan books from NAMA, IBRC, or any other source; to indicate which of these entities had section 110 status; the nature of the loan book, the sales value in each case, if available; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23926/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 134 and 136 together.
NAMA's market activities mean that it competes on an ongoing basis with banks and other financial institutions to attract investors and competitive bids for its loans and for the assets securing them. In that context, and in line with its competitors, I am advised that NAMA does not identify the counterparties with which it transacts, as to do so would discourage potential buyers from participating in NAMA loan and other asset sales and would place NAMA and by extension Irish taxpayers at a competitive disadvantage relative to its competitors. This commercial imperative is recognised in FOI legislation: Schedule 1 of the FOI ACT 2014 excludes from the scope of FOI "purchasers or potential purchasers of any asset or loan or of any asset securing loans held or managed" by NAMA and a number of other bodies.
Additionally, the Special Liquidators of IBRC devised and ran a competitive sales process, following the receipt of independent advice, for all loan assets of IBRC which they have sold. I had no role in this process and would therefore be unaware of potential bidders during the sales process or how these potential bidders were structured as a company.
