The North’s former first minister Peter Robinson gave evidence at a fraud trial concerning the National Asset Management Agency’s Northern Ireland loan book.
Corporate financier Frank Cushnahan from Alexandra Gate in Holywood is currently on trial on a charge of fraud.
The 83-year old has been charged with, and denies, an alleged offence of fraud by failing to disclose information between April 1st and November 7th, 2013. Ian George Coulter (54), a former managing partner of Tughans solicitors, had also been charged.
The charge relates to the sale of the Northern Ireland property loan book held by the National Asset Management Agency (Nama), which was set up in the Republic in 2009 following the property crash and banking crisis.
RM Block
He spent 40 minutes being questioned by barristers from both the prosecution and defence and at one point told the jury that Mr Cushnanan was appointed in a local government role by direct rule ministers and that “once they left, they left the furniture and Frank.”
The former DUP leader was questioned first by prosecuting barrister Jonathan Kinnear KC and confirmed he held the position as first minister from 2008 until his retirement in 2016.
Mr Kinnear then asked Mr Robinson how long he had know Mr Cushnahan and he said “30 or 40 years” with their first association dating back to when Mr Cushnahan was the chairman of Belfast Harbour Commissioners.
The prosecuting barrister then asked Mr Robinson to “move forward to a specific event” – a meeting at Stormont on May 22, 2013 in relation to the Northern Ireland loan book and Nama.
Mr Robinson confirmed he was at the meeting, as was Mr Cushnahan and representatives from the US investment fund Pimco as well as the then finance minister Sammy Wilson.
Asked if he could recall what was discussed at this meeting, Mr Robinson described it as a “meet and greet” and said it was an opportunity to let potential investors know “how wonderful Northern Ireland was.”
Saying he felt this was “more the inquiry stage”, Mr Robinson said “I think at that stage Pimco were putting their toe in the water.”
Mr Kinnear then asked Mr Robinson about becoming aware that Pimco had “withdraw their interest” and he said this was when an article was published in the Republic.
He said he thought this article outlined “some form of change at the top of Pimco” and that he believed “maybe it was connected to that.”
Defence barrister Frank O’Donoghue KC, representing Mr Cushnahan, also posed questioned to the former First Minister.
Mr O’Donoghue asked Mr Robinson about Mr Cushnahan’s role within local government and his links with the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister.
Mr Robinson said Mr Cushnahan’s “relationship with government” went back before the executive was formed.
He said: “He was appointed in the first instance by direct rule ministers so when they left, they left the furniture and Frank.”
The witness was then asked about the Northern Ireland Advisory Committee (NIAC) which was set up by Nama to advise in respect of the property debts in Northern Ireland.
Mr Cushnahan was appointed as an external member of NIAC in May 2010 and resigned in November 2013.
Mr Robinson confirmed he was aware of the committee, that it included members from Northern Ireland but that it didn’t hold any powers or control that the Nama board had.
Mr O’Donoghue then asked Mr Robinson if the political administration in the Republic of Ireland was aware of the concerns held by the executive “in terms of the work of Nama and its potential to damage the economy in Northern Ireland.”
Mr Robinson replied and said “they were aware of it and perhaps more than that, they did take it into account and were very helpful throughout that process.”
When asked his understanding of what NIAC did, Mr Robinson said “it was to give the opportunity for concerns about anything that Nama was doing in Northern Ireland, to be able to represent those concerns through the committee to Nama and I suppose this was a two-way street.”
He added that it was his understanding that the committee “was not given any of the confidential information so I don’t think we learned very much on the other route backwards.”
Mr Robinson was also asked if he had any personal involvement with Pimco after the meeting at Stormont in May 2013.
He said he “no, not that all I can recall” and added: “We would have had some conversations, probably at North-South Ministerial Council meetings about Pimco but not with Pimco.”
When asked about Pimco’s withdrawal in March 2014, Mr Robinson spoke again of the news article and a change in senior staff at the fund.
He said: “I think there was a feeling that perhaps they had decided to go in a different direction.
“As it turned out that wasn’t the reason but that was the thinking a the time.”
When asked if that was the reason presented by Pimco, Mr Robinson replied “They didn’t present any reason to us.”
Following this, he was addressed by trial judge, Madam Justice McBride who said “thank you very much Mr Robinson. You can step down.”
