I want to raise with the Taoiseach the sale of NAMA's Northern Ireland loan book, known as Project Eagle. This is the largest sale in which NAMA has engaged to date. We know from correspondence to the Minister, Deputy Noonan, at the time that even though misgivings were raised by one of the bidders - Pimco, which made NAMA aware of fee arrangements with third parties including NAMA's adviser on the Northern Ireland advisory committee - the Minister did not suggest to NAMA that the whole thing should be stopped in light of the stench that was emerging at that early stage. Of course, we know about the fee arrangements between the solicitors' firms - Brown Rudnick and Tughans - and third parties. Deputy Wallace has alluded to this in the Dáil. Again, no attempt was made stop the deal. People ticked the boxes and said they got assurances when Cerberus came in, despite the fact that they used the same solicitors' firms and the same fee arrangements to which NAMA had been alerted by Pimco. When I raised this issue with the Taoiseach in July of this year, I outlined all of my concerns. There are fundamental issues here because it involves the taxpayer. According to a report in this morning's The Irish News:

One of the bidders for Nama's northern debt portfolio expressed concern in a letter to the Taoiseach's office over the business practices of third parties leading up to the £1.2bn sale. Fortress Investment Group, [apparently] one of the final three potential buyers alongside US rivals Pimco and Cerberus Capital Management, is understood to have sent the letter to the Department of the Taoiseach in February 2014.

A question, please.

It seems that this letter "complained about business practices leading up to the sale of Nama's loan book, dubbed Project Eagle". Can the Taoiseach confirm that such a letter was sent to him and his Department? If so, can he confirm the contents of that letter and will he make arrangements to publish that letter? The Minister, Deputy Noonan, did not alert the Dáil at any stage about this entire saga until it was raised by a Deputy in the House. It is important for the Taoiseach to indicate whether he received such a letter. What happened in relation to any correspondence he received? What is his current position in relation to the ongoing investigations into Project Eagle?

This is a matter of very considerable concern. Obviously, questions about it have been raised and answered here previously. I think the Deputy said that a letter was sent to the office of the Taoiseach in February 2014. Is that his information?

That is what is being said.

Yes. I do not know, but I will have it checked immediately. If such a letter was received, I will see what happened in respect of it being replied to or where that was sent to, I will have the letter published and I will come back to Deputy Martin as soon as possible. As I stand here, I cannot recall receiving a letter in February 2014. If the Deputy says it was sent to the office of the Taoiseach, I am sure there is a record. I will have it checked and I will respond to the Deputy as soon as I can.

I would appreciate it if the Taoiseach would do that. It appears that his office was asked to do so yesterday, but it did not respond to the questions that were put to it regarding this correspondence. I would like to refer to the international investigation, particularly in the United States, where the matter is being taken extremely seriously. The national crime investigation unit or service in the United Kingdom is also involved in investigating this deal. Given that this involves Irish taxpayers, who would be the ultimate beneficiaries of the sale of these assets, does the Taoiseach not accept that there is an extraordinary contrast between how the Irish authorities are responding to this saga and how the UK authorities and the US criminal investigation authorities are responding to this serious issue? How does the Taoiseach account for the rather light response from the Irish authorities?

The Deputy has described the response of the Irish authorities in a very particular way. I am advised that the loan sale was executed in a proper manner. Despite all the confusion and the coverage in the media, the fact is that there are no claims of wrongdoing against NAMA. The loan portfolio sold for €1.5 billion because that is what the properties securing the loans were worth. The original amounts of €5.7 billion that were loaned by the banks prior to the establishment of NAMA have no relevance to the current value of the underlying property security. I am informed that NAMA paid no moneys to, or had any relationship with, any party to this loan sale against which allegations of wrongdoing are now being made. The loan portfolio was sold to the highest bidder for what it was worth following an open process. Attempts to conflate NAMA's open market loan sale process with an internal issue on the other side of the sale are wrong. As is now known, NAMA did not appear before the Committee for Finance and Personnel of the Northern Ireland Assembly. I understand it is not the intention of NAMA to be in any way unhelpful in the committee's work. It seems that its decision not to appear before the committee was a reflection of its sensitivity to the fact that it is accountable here to the Minister for Finance and the Oireachtas through committees like the Committee of Public Accounts-----

It sounds like the attitude of the European Central Bank to the banking inquiry.

-----before which it recently appeared to discuss these important issues. Furthermore, as Deputy Martin will understand, NAMA undertook to respond to any written questions that the Northern Ireland Assembly committee may have regarding the sale which were not covered during the appearance of NAMA before the Committee of Public Accounts on 9 July. Last month, the committee submitted a list of questions to NAMA regarding the sales process. On 4 September, NAMA responded to the committee with detailed responses to its questions. The full response of over 300 pages is available on NAMA's website and has also been provided to the Committee of Public Accounts. Obviously, people with an interest would read that material. As I have said, I will check the report that a letter was received in the Department of the Taoiseach in February 2014 and I will advise Deputy Martin in that regard as soon as possible.

I would appreciate that.