NAMA risk assessments etc FOI

[gavinsblog]

I know many of you will be interested in this FOI I originally submitted in August, related to NAMA.

1) A list of all cost-benefit analyses, impact reports or preparatory reports that have been carried out by the Department in relation to the proposed National Asset Management Agency (NAMA). Please can you list the title of the document, its date, and by whom it was written.

2) A list of all cost-benefit analyses, impact reports, or preparatory reports that have been carried out by people or companies working on behalf of, or at the request of the Department, in relation to the proposed National Asset Management Agency (NAMA). Please can you list the title of the document, its date, and by whom it was written.

Results here:

NAMA and risk reports – The Story

[Malbekh]

I'll trawl though this later - once again kudos for the hard work and money you put into keeping things transparent, or at the very least slightly opaque.

/salute

[Malbekh]

I see what you mean about project Neo. I've definitely been of the opinion for some time that Anglo Irish is not going to be wound down or merged with another bank, but instead will be used as a conduit to support ISME's as the government cannot rely on the AIB/BOI to do the same.

One thing I can't find though, my understanding is that the board in Anglo gave a detailed plan to the government sometime in the early summer, which was then passed on to the ECB. My belief is that the ECB told the government in no uncertain terms to take drastic action in taking a large axe on the plan and coming up with something more substantive.

Would it be unreasonable to think that this is project Neo? Also, wasn't the plan on Anglo to be presented to the ECB in November? I haven't heard anything on it yet.

[Eamonn20Bn plus interest]

Well done on this. It should make interesting reading.

[cactusflower]

Tantalising.

[Dreaded_Estate]

NAMA and risk reports – The Story

A interesting list of NAMA and banking reports commissioned by the Department of Finance and released under on FOI from Gavin Sheridan

A little bit of a saga ended today, finally. It is worth noting the dates involved in this request.

On August 17 I sought the following information from the Department of Finance:

1) A list of all cost-benefit analyses, impact reports or preparatory reports that have been carried out by the Department in relation to the proposed National Asset Management Agency (NAMA). Please can you list the title of the document, its date, and by whom it was written.

2) A list of all cost-benefit analyses, impact reports, or preparatory reports that have been carried out by people or companies working on behalf of, or at the request of the Department, in relation to the proposed National Asset Management Agency (NAMA). Please can you list the title of the document, its date, and by whom it was written.

I received my acknowledgment as standard, which was followed up with an email. The email said it was unlikely my request would be successful but if I wanted, I could be given information outside of my request. I went along with this and it resulted in this blog post on September 30. That’s in and around the 20 day limit under the Act.

But I didn’t feel the information provided was sufficient, and I always wanted information should my request be refused. So I said I still wanted to proceed with my original request. The Department then took the date of my re-request as the initial date, thus giving them another 20 working days. This brought the result of the request into early November, despite an initial request in August.

Numerous emails were sent, and replied to. The civil servants involved were “busy” with NAMA and it was taking longer than normal to reply to my request. Last week I had enough, and wrote an email seeking an internal review as my request was now a deemed refusal since the 20 day limit had expired. Today, December 8, nearly four months later, I got the reply.