There is growing concern regarding the workings of NAMA and whether the taxpayer has been well served by it . The Taoiseach seems content that all is well, but I know many people who think otherwise. The Tánaiste is an accountant and might have more concerns than the Taoiseach. There have been disturbing allegations around the largest ever sale of property in the history of the island of Ireland. The Northern Ireland loan portfolio, Project Eagle, involving more than 850 properties with a par value of €4.5 billion, was sold to US private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management for less than €1.5 billion, a surprise winner of the tender.

In June 2012, following consultation with the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, and Mr. Sammy Wilson MLA, NAMA reappointed Mr. Frank Cushnahan and Mr. Brian Rowntree to the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee. Two weeks later, a report by a Northern Ireland auditor's office seriously questioned the stewardship of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, which led to the resignation of Brian Rowntree and Frank Cushnahan. The report found breaches of housing executive guidelines in the sale of at least 27 land deals, the executive board being given wrong or no information relating to key property deals, favoured property speculators being allowed to buy land well under market value, expressions of interest from other parties not being declared or considered, and at times no reasons being offered for some off-market sales.

These two individuals stayed in NAMA, one of them up until the summer of 2014. Does the Tánaiste think this was a good idea? Back in 2009, the Tánaiste proposed an oversight committee for NAMA, with the purpose of informing the public about what is happening in NAMA. In the past four and a half years, has the Tánaiste at any time considered putting that idea forward again? Given this has not been done, does the Tánaiste believe now is the time for a serious look at how NAMA operates? We need an independent inquiry to see if the interests of the taxpayers have always been the top priority for NAMA.

I am not familiar with the details of the particular case the Deputy outlined. The issue of the oversight of NAMA and proper procedures is important because NAMA was, in effect, a kind of bad bank for the explosion that happened in the Irish property market when construction and the financing of it fell apart.

In regard to the arrangements made for NAMA, I suggest that if the Deputy has not already done so, he should submit a detailed question such as this to the Minister for Finance. I do not know whether any of these questions have been raised with NAMA or whether the Deputy has raised his concerns with NAMA. However, as the Deputy knows, the Comptroller and Auditor General has oversight of NAMA and closely oversees the work it does. When the arrangements regarding NAMA and the banks, following the collapse of the banks, were established, a decision made by the previous Government was followed by the current Government. That decision was that the governance and organisation of NAMA's affairs would not be run directly out of the Civil Service and, in particular, would not be run directly by politicians. I believe this was the correct decision and that it is better that it is run as a business.

NAMA was also set up with a specific legal structure which was debated at length in the House. This was further strengthened by the current Government in the context of oversight by the Comptroller and Auditor General. As the Deputy knows, the Comptroller and Auditor General reports directly to the Committee of Public Accounts, of which a member of the Opposition is Chairman and at which members of all groups and parties are represented. Any issues concerning NAMA are significant, but I do not have a direct answer for the specific query raised by the Deputy. The structure of oversight and governance, along with the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Committee of Public Accounts, seems to be the right avenue through which to address the issue.

I suggest the Deputy should get one of the Technical Group's representatives on the committee to raise the issue with the Comptroller and Auditor General. If the committee wishes, it should then examine the issue. In previous cases regarding issues arising in organisations, that mechanism has worked well.

I remind the House again that the naming of persons outside of the House is regulated by Standing Orders and by rulings of the Chair. It is not the practice to name people in the House.

Am I to take from what she said that the Tánaiste is happy with how NAMA has worked? The oversight mechanism she proposed in 2009 has not happened, but does she not feel it would have been a significant benefit? She did not address that question.

The Tánaiste said it would be better if politicians were not involved in this episode.

We have had politicians involved and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, and Mr. Sammy Wilson, MLA, were involved in the reappointment of the two men concerned. One of them was reappointed for a second time in 2014, despite the damning report of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. I find that difficult to understand and I also find it difficult to accept that the Tánaiste would be okay with that.

The legal firm acting for Cerberus Capital Management, which purchased the Northern Ireland loan portfolio for €1.5 billion, was Tughans of Belfast. It has been reported that during a routine audit-----

This is not an inquisition. This is Leaders' Questions. Will Deputy Wallace put a question please? He is out of time.

It is about taxpayers' money.

It is reported-----

Deputy Wallace cannot use the Chamber to make cases against people who are not here to defend themselves. Deputy Wallace knows the regulations as well as I do and he has been reminded often enough. The Deputy should please stick to the Standing Orders or else I will have to cut him off. He should ask his question.

We are talking about billions of taxpayers' money.

There are other places to make such charges but not in the House where people are not here to defend themselves. I do not know anything about those people but there is a rule and I have to apply the rules. Deputy Wallace should please adhere to them.

I am not telling anything that was made up.

I am asking Deputy Wallace to adhere to the rules of the House. If he wishes the rules to change he should bring them to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Would Deputy Wallace please put his question to the Tánaiste?

Does the Tánaiste have any concerns that a routine audit of a solicitor's firm that looked after the deal showed €4.5 billion of assets were sold for €1.5 billion, with a massive loss for the taxpayer? The routine audit showed that £7 million sterling ended up in an Isle of Man bank account-----

Deputy Wallace.

It was reportedly earmarked for a Northern Ireland politician or party.

Will Deputy Wallace give all those details to An Garda Síochána? That is what it is there for.

Does the Tánaiste not think the matter should be looked at?

In terms of this House and under the Constitution, the Comptroller and Auditor General has a specific role, including in regard to the oversight of NAMA. There have been three special reports on NAMA's activities by the Comptroller and Auditor General and they have been broadly positive in their assessment of how NAMA is managing what is a very complex business. I regret that NAMA ever had to exist and that good builders such as Deputy Wallace and the people who worked for him ended up in the crash that followed losing a huge amount of employment and a huge amount of money, but that is what happened when the economy was run into a brick wall. It is very difficult to give a definitive answer on the recovery value of anything which previously had a certain value and which lost its value following the crash.

The Comptroller and Auditor General has done a series of reports on NAMA. I am not clear on whether Deputy Wallace is basically saying he does not accept the Comptroller and Auditor General's reports.

Its remit is limited.

There is a remedy available to Members of the House because the Comptroller and Auditor General is answerable to the Committee of Public Accounts. We have seen the committee examining reports the C&AG has brought forward on several organisations. I cannot answer individual statements the Deputy has made on particular cases. If what he is saying is correct, he should go to the Garda, the board of NAMA and the C&AG, but I do not wish to comment on the specifics because I am not familiar with them. Is Deputy Wallace saying he has no confidence in the ability of the C&AG process and the Committee of Public Accounts to investigate the issues?

The Tánaiste is the one answering the questions.

If that is the case, it is regrettable.

Does she have confidence in NAMA?

I believe we need an independent inquiry.

In a few years time the Tánaiste will be in before another committee for the NAMA tribunal.

Yes, it is outrageous.

Before I come to the Order of Business, I wish to refer to another matter. I know people in Baltimore are grieving at this point in time and I wish to express the sympathy of the House to the families who have been bereaved in the drowning tragedy there - the Ryan family and that of Niamh O'Connor.