Sharon Keogan demands reform after Project Eagle report delay
Sharon Keogan criticised the seven-year Project Eagle report and called for clearer conflict-of-interest legislation and faster publication procedures. She challenged the report's assessment of price fairness, cited a 2016 Comptroller and Auditor-General estimate of an £313 million undersell in today's currency, and raised allegations of payments to an insider.
Report findings and ambiguity
The archived report took seven years to complete and concluded there were no significant deficiencies in the board's management of the situation involving its former advisor Mr Frank Cushnahan, who was aiding PIMCO. Keogan said the findings nonetheless exhibit ambiguity and highlight serious concerns about how conflicts of interest and transparency are handled in large financial transactions such as Project Eagle.
Conflict of interest and revolving doors
Keogan argued it is imperative to revise legislation on the management of conflicts of interest to provide a clearer and more effective legal framework. She warned that frequent movement of individuals among government, quangos, NGOs and the private sector - the so-called revolving doors - creates persistent risks that current rules do not adequately address.
Pricing, Comptroller and outstanding allegations
Keogan questioned how the report could assert Project Eagle secured a fair price given the Comptroller and Auditor-General's 2016 estimate that NAMA had undersold the portfolio by approximately £313 million in today’s currency. She also asked why the report did not address allegations raised by former TD Mick Wallace that the final buyer, Cerebitus, had made payments to an insider at NAMA and called for a comprehensive investigation into those claims.
Delay, accountability and requests to the Minister
Keogan criticised the protracted timeline for completion and publication of the report, saying long delays allow those involved to move on without accountability. She urged the Minister of Finance to clarify ambiguous responses in the report and pressed for simplified procedures governing the compilation and release of such inquiries to ensure timely accountability.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Earlier this week I was talking about the NAMA issue again and the management of Project Eagle. This report has taken seven years to complete and while its findings exhibit ambiguity they nonetheless highlight significant concerns regarding the way this country addresses conflicts of interest and transparency, particularly in relation to substantial financial transactions such as those involved in Project Eagle. Although the report concludes that there was no significant deficiencies in the Board's management of the situation involving its former advisor Mr Frank Cushnahan who was aiding PIMCO, one of the potential purchasers of the portfolio, this incident ought to serve as a critical wake-up call. It is imperative that we revise our legislation concerning the management of conflict of interest will require clearer and more effective legal framework to eliminate the issues associated with revolving doors of employment and financial interests. All too frequently we observe individuals transitioning frequently among various roles in government, quangos, NGOs and the private sector. Moreover, the protracted duration taken to release this report is particularly troubling. There is a pressing need for a simplification of the procedures governing the complication of such reports. Often the extended timeline for their completion and publication allows the individuals and organisations involved to move on without accountability. Lastly, I urge the Minister of Finance to provide clarification on certain ambiguous responses presented in the report. For instance, how can the report assert that Project Eagle secured a fair price for its portfolio, considering the Comptroller and Auditor-General's 2016 report, which estimated the NAMA had undersold by approximately £313 million in today's currency? Furthermore, why does the report not address the allegations made by former TD Mick Wallace, indicating that the final buyer of the portfolio, Cerebitus, had made payments to an insider at NAMA? Will there be any comprehensive investigation into these allegations, or will we be left waiting another seven years for additional vague and ambiguous statements? Senator Coogan, if I could just remind you, you cannot reference people outside the House. They were named in the report, so I am quite happy. If you just be careful. Thank you very much. That is no problem at all. Thank you. Senator Alexander.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
