Today's Irish Independent contains a report that a dossier has been presented to the Garda Commissioner on the conduct of a previous employee of NAMA. It indicates the dossier includes an allegation that the official fed information from NAMA to named individuals who should not have received it. The Irish Daily Mail also references very serious allegations of price manipulation and off-market deals. My understanding is that several news outlets have significantly more information, which they are examining, involving potentially improper behaviour by NAMA. I hope, as I am sure we all do, that these allegations are baseless but if they are not, it is possible the State will be exposed to very significant costs if an aggrieved party sought and was awarded damages for potential wrong behaviour. Regardless of whether the allegations are true - I hope they are not - they compromise NAMA's ability while they are left untested, and the agency cannot do the best job it can in returning as much money to the State as possible. For example, a potential bidder for NAMA assets may decide it will not bid as it may feel other bidders have access to confidential information which they do not.

These are not new allegations, as the Taoiseach knows. The allegations around the official surfaced in 2011 and the Garda began investigations at NAMA's request in 2011. In 2012 NAMA conducted its own report. Since 2011 and the initial allegations, what steps has the Government taken to ensure no leaking of confidential information from NAMA can take place? Is the Taoiseach satisfied that all steps have been taken and that NAMA is now watertight?

The Government is taking this matter very seriously and the point raised is one of concern and substance. I note the statement yesterday from NAMA. It states:

The Senator's comments in the Seanad this afternoon suggest that he has evidence of impropriety involving staff members of NAMA. He has not shared any such evidence with NAMA. Nor has NAMA received such evidence from any other party. If the Senator or any other party has evidence of any impropriety, they are legally obliged, under section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 2011, to bring it to the immediate attention of the Garda Síochána.

That means the Act, since going through the House and becoming law, makes it a criminal offence not to follow a legal requirement if somebody has information about impropriety to bring it to the attention of the Garda directly. The Minister for Finance, the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Government is not involved in carrying out any criminal investigations, although these are serious matters. I repeat that anybody with information about improprieties, illegal actions etc. should bring them to light under the relevant section of the Act.

There are specific offences under the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009 regarding the inappropriate disclosure of confidential information. I understand an investigation by An Garda Síochána into a complaint made by NAMA some time ago against a former employee is at a very advanced stage. I cannot comment on that. More recently, in August this year, An Garda Síochána received a separate complaint from a firm of solicitors acting on behalf of a client relating to the alleged disclosure of information by NAMA.

The Garda, which is the appropriate authority, has been awaiting receipt of further documentation from the solicitors concerned. The Garda will fully investigate any allegations of criminal activity. I understand that NAMA was informed by a journalist over the weekend that certain allegations had been made by a former employee about the activities of current and former NAMA staff. NAMA cannot and will not issue any public comment about ongoing Garda investigations or the background to them so as not to prejudice the outcome of any investigations that take place. NAMA has not been contacted by the Garda to date in connection with the allegations. Other than what appeared in the public press yesterday, NAMA has no specific knowledge of these allegations and therefore will not make any public comment other than the press statement it issued yesterday indicating that if somebody has an issue, he or she should bring it to the attention of the relevant authorities forthwith.

It seems to me – many Deputies in the House would agree – that an organisation as powerful as NAMA, dealing with such sensitive information, should never have been set up under the veil of secrecy that prevails. I accept that it was not set up by the Government. The Garda will investigate the allegations and if it deems it appropriate a file will be prepared for the Director of Public Prosecutions. Is the Taoiseach confident that sufficient systems and processes are in place such that NAMA is watertight? It must be above reproach. I hope the allegations are unfounded and untrue, but the suggestion is that NAMA is leaking confidential information. The Taoiseach referred to a second case, about which lawyers have been contacted, in which it is alleged that confidential information was leaked. There may be more to come. NAMA must be above reproach. It must be able to operate in such a way that it can return as much money to the State as possible. Is the Taoiseach comfortable that the systems and procedures in NAMA are as good as they can possibly be? If he is not, does he think it might be wise to urgently set up an independent external review of those systems and procedures? The Garda cannot do it; it is not set up to do that. NAMA cannot do it. No body can investigate itself in that way. Does the Taoiseach think there is a compelling argument for setting up a quick and urgent investigation to look at those systems and procedures such that anybody who is dealing with NAMA, or anyone who is looking at buying assets from NAMA, can be absolutely assured that people they are bidding against could not possibly have access to confidential information which would make it more difficult for them to bid fairly?

The Government takes the matter very seriously. Two cases arise; one formal investigation by the Garda is nearing completion and I expect it will come to a conclusion. The second arises from a recent contact. NAMA has not been formally contacted by the Garda arising from those allegations.

Deputy Donnelly made a point about people perhaps not following through on an initial interest in a property or loan because of the concern that somebody might have other information. He is aware that NAMA requires that all loans, properties and other assets be secured on a competitive, fully open basis by suitably qualified sales agents, and in all events NAMA insists on independent valuations of assets to deal with that particular issue. It also requires that sales agents prepare a final report and recommendation. In the reports it is a requirement that there be a summary of the marketing campaign undertaken; a list of all parties who expressed an interest in the loan or real estate or were contacted during the marketing campaign; a recommendation to accept the terms of the purchaser's offer as the best price reasonably obtainable, and confirmation that the agent has reviewed the purchaser's confirmation relating to connected party sales; a statement disclosing any commercial relationship between the agent, the debtor, the purchaser or the purchaser's ultimate beneficial owners in the past five years; and how any actual or perceived conflict of interest was managed during the sales process. Deputy Donnelly will understand why that applies. It applies to all interested parties, so that they are given equal opportunity to bid for and to purchase loans or properties sold by NAMA or by NAMA debtors and receivers. I, no more than any other citizen in the country, am bound by legislation in terms of making contact with NAMA. I accept Deputy Donnelly's point. As to whether I am happy or confident that all the systems are in order, I am not in touch with NAMA because of the provisions that exist, but the Minister for Finance is in touch with NAMA in respect of official matters and, following the conclusion of the two Garda investigations - if the Garda follows through on the second one - it is clearly an issue of which the Minister would be cognisant, taking into account the constraints upon him as a citizen or public representative in terms of the law.