Comment by TUV leader Jim Allister:-

Despite a rash of statements from some of the players, it seems to me the full truth of NAMAgate has not been told. There are still many key unanswered Questions:-

1. When exactly did Frank Cushnahan resign from the NAMA NI Advisory Committee? DFP, which recommended him for appointment, has failed to answer this simple factual question. Why? This is important to the Pimco/Cerberus/Tughans timeline.

2. Why did Frank Cushnahan resign from the NI Advisory Committee when he did?

3. Who are “the third parties” who made the unsolicited approach to PIMCO and what “arrangement” did they seek for themselves?

4. If PIMCO’s proposed fee arrangement with Brown Rudnick included payment to a former member of NAMA’s NI Advisory Committee, what service had he rendered to PIMCO, and when?

5. How did Brown Rudnick come to act for both PIMCO and Cerberus?

6. Did any NI politician make any approach to PIMCO or at any time meet with PIMCO and, if so, when and why?

7. Why and when did Frank Cushnahan have an office in Tughans?

8. Were Tughans formally instructed as NI agent for Brown Rudnick on behalf of Cerberus and, if so, where is the letter of instruction and what were its terms?

9. If Tughans were formally instructed, then, what was the role of A & L Goodbody?

10. If Frank Cushnahan was a “referrer of work” to Tughans, what work relevant to the NAMA saga did he refer and what was the remuneration arrangement?

11. What work was done for the £7m fee and where is Tughans’ billing statement and does same include disbursements to third parties?

12. Have any disbursements in fact been paid? (A solicitor’s bill normally includes their outlay, which could include relevant payments to third parties – for example in a RTA case cost of obtaining medical reports, police reports etc – which they then recover from the client by including same in their billing statement.)

13. Were A & L Goodbody also paid for work done and if so, what was Tughans being paid for?????

14. Why was it thought necessary to have the money transferred to the Isle of Man and by whom and when was this done?

15. Was the IOM account a Tughans account and, if not, how was the money ‘retrieved’?

16. Upon discovering undeclared funds in the Isle of Man why did Tughans not alert the police to the potential criminality involved?

17. Was the money at any stage paid into a client account and, if so, why?

18. Was it intended at any stage to remunerate non lawyer third parties, given that Art 28(1) of the Solicitors Order makes it a criminal offence for a solicitor to knowingly share any of his professional profits or fees with an unqualified person.

19. What discussions did the First Minister have with Cerberus both before and after the deal – his statement of 4/4/14 refers to a conversation with Dan Quayle of Cerberus and the promise of follow up meetings (OFMDFM has failed to answer AQW 46638/11-15 on this subject)?

20. Did Cerberus buy information which informed their bid? If so, wouldn’t that be of interest to the US regulator?

21. If unexplained payments were made as part of the Cerberus deal will the US Regulatory Authority, the Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC), now pursue Cerberus for answers?