Daniel Plainview wrote:
I find that part hilarious. She'd be up in arms if some of the INBS mortgages transferred to IBRC were charged 7.5%. I'd love to know where she got that figure from and I'd love to know if the 1% she cites is margin or all-in.
So your moral compass tells you that because loads of other politicians abused dail privilege previously its grand? Regardless, your reference is probably a little before my time.
So if it's all-in then you accept there's an issue?
Or will you try to wriggle out then too?
And you think that his term extension and rate review not going to credit committee (on a c. €500mln facility) is not suspicious and worthy of political investigation, considering the bank was a state asset (liability) at that time?
What have I tried to wriggle out of? Please answer this.
if it's all-in then it was badly priced.
Re loan committee - Mike Ansley has subsequently implied that all transactions did go to loan committee - suitably worded as he'S precluded from discussing individual borrowers. Who do you believe?
Again, Similar to the sale of siteserv, a breach of practice, if material, is for ibrc to answer, not the borrower. Murphy rejects the idea she is electioneering, yet why has she brought the specific borrowers name into the public domain? Why not "Borrower A"?
I still fail to see where the 7% comes from. If the loan expired it would've incurred interest as was plus the default rate - most likely 2.5% (Default rate that is).