Dáil Éireann

Vol. 708 Tuesday, No. 3 11 May 2010 DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DÁIL ÉIREANN TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised) Tuesday, 11 May 2010. Ceisteanna — Questions Taoiseach ………………………………… 441 Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs Priority Questions …………………………… 451 Other Questions …………………………… 460 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 464 Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 465 Requests to move Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 32 ……………… 472 Order of Business ……………………………… 474 Energy (Biofuel Obligation and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2010 [Seanad]: Second Stage (resumed) 485 Sea Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction (Fixed Penalty Notice) (Amendment) Bill 2009: Second Stage ……………………………… 502 Adjournment Debate Cancer Screening Programme ………………………… 521 Mental Health Services …………………………… 523 RoadNetwork………………………………525 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 527 DÁIL ÉIREANN ———— Dé Máirt, 11 Bealtaine 2010. Tuesday, 11 May 2010. ———— Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 14.30 p.m. ———— Paidir. Prayer. ———— Ceisteanna — Questions. ———— Tribunals of Inquiry 1. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the costs which accrued to his Department in February 2010 in respect of the Moriarty tribunal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12954/10] 2. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the projected additional costs that will accrue to his Department arising from the decision of the Moriarty tribunal to hold additional public sittings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12955/10] 3. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the costs accruing to his Department arising from the Moriarty tribunal up to the latest date for which figures are available; if any estimate is available of the likely final cost to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13687/10] 4. Deputy Michael Lowry asked the Taoiseach the breakdown of overall costs for the Moriarty tribunal for the months of January, February and March in 2010. [17826/10] 5. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the estimated cost to his Department of the additional public sittings of the Moriarty tribunal and the projected final cost of the tribunal to his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18791/10] The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, together. Total expenditure by my Department from the establishment of the Moriarty tribunal to the end of April 2010 was €39.36 million. Expenditure in January, February and March of this year was €414,962, €259,321 and €200,302, respectively. The sole member of the tribunal, Mr. Justice Moriarty, has not yet addressed third party costs. Until this is done, we cannot estimate the overall cost of the tribunal with any accuracy. The tribunal secretariat has on many occasions over the years told my Department that any attempt by the tribunal to quantify third party costs would lead to conclusions being drawn and suppositions being made, which could infringe on the rights of witnesses and impinge on the independence of the tribunal. As Deputies will 441 Ceisteanna — 11 May 2010. Questions. [The Taoiseach.] be aware, the Comptroller and Auditor General’s special report on tribunals of inquiry, in attempting to establish some estimate of the overall cost of the Moriarty tribunal, gave various ranges for third party costs but stressed that the figures were subject to many caveats and contingencies. It is not possible at this point to estimate with any accuracy the likely cost to my Department of any additional public sittings. Deputy Enda Kenny: This tribunal has been going on for many years. According to the figures produced by the Taoiseach, it has cost almost €40 million. As he said, we are not yet in a position to know what the third party costs might be. Some of the legal people employed by the tribunal have cost in excess of €1,000 a day. Given the significant increase in costs because witnesses have had to be called as a result of two errors that were made arising from the work of the tribunal, does the Taoiseach believe that the sole chairman of the tribunal is now in a position to produce a credible and impartial report? What area of Exchequer funds will have to be diverted to pay for the additional costs that will arise from these mistakes? Given that no report has been produced so far, does the Taoiseach consider that the €40 million spent to date — we do not know the figure for third party costs — represents good value for money? The Taoiseach: An earlier report, on another aspect of the tribunal’s work, was produced in December 2006. That was the first report of the tribunal. We are awaiting its second and final report. The tribunal has lasted much longer than was expected at the time of its establishment. In addition to the length and complexity of the tribunal’s terms of reference, factors which have contributed to its duration include litigation against the tribunal instituted by individuals connected with its work, the illness of certain witnesses and material that came to light in the course of the Ansbacher investigation which had to be considered by the tribunal. This necessi- tated almost a year’s work by way of private investigation. The tribunal has been in existence for over 12 years. There must be a focus on its completing its work as soon as possible. It is obvious that the recent attendance of additional witnesses from the Office of the Attorney General and the possible attendance of Mr. Michael Andersen, whose firm was a consultant in the GSM evaluation process, will further delay the completion of the report. We are waiting for all such witnesses to come before the tribunal to be cross- examined and to deal with any issues that arise in respect of which they can be helpful. This tribunal, like other tribunals, is a creation of the Oireachtas and carries out its functions independently. It emphasises and adopts a certain methodology for the carrying out of its work. I do not believe I should make any comment in that regard, other than to mention that I have been inquiring about when the report may be completed. The correspondence has indicated it is not possible to state exactly when that will happen. There is correspondence with Mr. Ander- sen’s solicitor with a view to clarifying matters. While the chairman is not in a position yet to be categoric about the impact of this development on the completion of his work, he wishes to make it clear that he is determined that the delay will be as of a short duration and consistent with the discharge of his remit and the safeguarding of the constitutional rights of those persons affected by the inquiries. He does not anticipate that any such delay will protract his work beyond a short number of months, which is his best estimate. Deputy Enda Kenny: Some of the young students in the Visitors Gallery were only small children when this tribunal began. It is clear from the figures the Taoiseach has given today and in the past that members of the tribunal and its legal team are exceptionally well rewarded for the work in which they have been engaged, yet two serious errors occurred, both of which were admitted by the tribunal chairman and both of which should not have happened. 442 Ceisteanna — 11 May 2010. Questions. Fees are €1,500, €1,600 and €1,900 a day. The tribunal has gone on for more than 12 years, two serious mistakes have occurred and the expert consultant, Michael Andersen, has agreed to go back and give evidence. We are aware from reports what will be his evidence. This requires further public sittings and may require further legal objection. Has the Taoiseach been informed of the proposed number of sittings or the length of time for which the tribunal may have to sit again? One report suggests it will sit until 2012. Has he considered that legal people paid at these extraordinary rates presided over a situation where two serious and grievous errors occurred? Has he been informed of the likelihood of a number of further public sittings? Is there any truth in the rumour that this will go on to 2012 or possibly beyond? The Taoiseach: I just explained to the Deputy that this tribunal was a creation of the Oireachtas and, therefore, it is a matter for the Oireachtas to consider all these points. Deputy Enda Kenny: I know that. The Taoiseach: I cannot deal with rumours and the Deputy should not deal with them. I have just explained that the latest information I have from the sole member of the tribunal is that while he cannot be categoric about the impact of recent developments on the completion of his work, for example, the availability of Mr. Andersen, he is in correspondence with Mr. Andersen’s solicitor to clarify that matter, and he wishes to make it clear that he is determined that the delay will be as of a short duration and consistent with the discharge of his remit and the safeguarding of the constitutional rights of those persons affected by the inquiries. He further informs me that he does not anticipate that any such delay will protract his work beyond a short number of months. Recent Supreme Court judgments will have to be taken into account by this and other tribunals in respect of third party cost implications. Deputy Enda Kenny: What is another year? The Taoiseach: The correspondence is from the Sole Member, who is the person dealing with the tribunal proceedings. It is not a case of “what is another year?” He stated, “he does not anticipate that any such delay will protract his work beyond a short number of months”.It should be acknowledged that is the latest information I have from the sole member.

Load more