Vol. 699 Wednesday, No. 2 20 January 2010 DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DÁIL ÉIREANN TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised) Wednesday, 20 January 2010. Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 567 Ceisteanna—Questions Taoiseach ………………………………… 576 Requests to move Adjournment of Dáil under Standing Order 32 ……………… 585 Order of Business ……………………………… 586 European Council Meeting: Statements ……………………… 597 Ceisteanna—Questions (resumed) Minister for Defence Priority Questions …………………………… 614 Other Questions …………………………… 626 Private Notice Questions Industrial Action ……………………………… 638 Operational Co-operation on EU Internal Security: Motion………………… 646 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 655 Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (resumed)………656 Private Members’ Business Banking Crisis: Motion (resumed) ……………………… 675 Adjournment Debate Job Creation ……………………………… 702 Substance Abuse ……………………………… 704 Tourism Promotion …………………………… 706 School Libraries ……………………………… 709 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 711 DÁIL ÉIREANN ———— Dé Céadaoin, 20 Eanáir 2010. Wednesday, 20 January 2010. ———— Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m. ———— Paidir. Prayer. ———— Leaders’ Questions. Deputy Enda Kenny: Yesterday we had a number of questions, statements and the debate on a Labour Party motion in respect of the banking crisis and an investigation into that. The Government has published its proposals. Those proposals do not take into account the extent of public anger that is out there. I agree with the words of the Minister for Finance this morning when he said that what the public want to see is the law of the land implemented in respect of malpractice in banks and financial institutions. Two investigations are ongoing in that regard, one by the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and another by the fraud squad. I had hoped those investigations would have been brought to a conclusion earlier, but they are proceeding. When one considers the back- to-back loans, for instance, that were in evidence, which were electronic transactions, an investi- gation could have been completed in two hours and a file prepared for the DPP. In any event, the position in so far as the Government is now concerned is that there will be no forensic analysis of regulatory and policy failures or internal and audit competency that the public will be able to see. The public could see what happened with the committee of investigation into the Iraq war in Britain, or the financial inquiry commission in the United States. The Government has made a strong defence of the commission of investigation facility by saying the Murphy inquiry worked well, as did a number of other inquiries, which they did, but the victims in those cases were children who were victims of sexual abuse and the inquiries had to be held in private. The victims in these cases are the working taxpayers of this country who are now faced with pensions lost, negative equity, difficulty in paying mortgages and an understanding and percep- tion that white collar crime does pay. The way the Government published its proposals yesterday means there will be no forensic public analysis of what happened. It effectively means the Taoiseach, as a former Minister for Finance, who has said he wants to co-operate fully in any way he can, will not be called before an Oireachtas committee to give evidence. Why would that happen if what I assume is being talked about takes place, that the committee in question would be chaired by a member of the Fianna Fáil Party and would be most unlikely to call the Taoiseach, Deputy Cowen, the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, or the former Minister for Finance, Mr. Charlie McCreevy? In effect, the Government proposals for the scoping facility, the terms of reference for the commission of investigation and an Oireachtas committee being sidelined to the role of com- 567 Leaders’ 20 January 2010. Questions [Deputy Enda Kenny.] mentator means that there will not be public scrutiny and members of the public will not be able to see what happens in respect of the regulatory and policy failures that are concerned. Does the Taoiseach accept that, in effect, following the proposals announced in a gushing fashion by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, after his green summit with Fianna Fáil, the Taoiseach will never have to give evi- dence in public to account for policy positions adopted by him and his colleagues in Government? Deputies: Hear, hear. The Taoiseach: Deputy Kenny is talking patent nonsense. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: He is telling the truth and the Taoiseach knows it. Deputy P. J. Sheehan: The truth is bitter. The Taoiseach: The continuing allegations being made by him have no substance. The reverse is the case. What is proposed is designed to discover the true causes of the banking crisis—— Deputy Pádraic McCormack: That you reversed last night. The Taoiseach: ——not what people think or assume are the causes, and to do so through the use of the best available expertise and in a timely and cost effective manner. The framework which has been brought forward by Government seeks to learn from the lessons of the past where inquiries have gone on for too long and to ensure that answers are obtained as quickly as possible and within a timeframe in which they can inform what needs to be done. Ireland’s international reputation would not be assisted by an inefficient inquiry that is not focused. Such an inquiry would not serve the public as it would inhibit, not assist, the steps necessary for recovery. Each of the three essential stages of the inquiry involves the Oireachtas or uses a process determined by it. The first stage involves a preliminary consideration of the causes of the regulatory failures and banking crisis by independent experts. The Oireachtas will be involved from the beginning because the Oireachtas committee will meet the Governor of the Central Bank and the independent expert or experts at the outset to brief them on the priorities of the Oireachtas for investigation. Those experts will independently consider what happened, provide their preliminary view on the causes, decide what needs to be done and the further investigation that needs to be carried out. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe: Who does the Taoiseach have in mind? The Taoiseach: The second stage uses a process—— Deputy P. J. Sheehan: Paddy the plasterer. The Taoiseach: ——the commission of investigation, which the Oireachtas has determined — based on the lessons of the past — is an efficient and cost effective method of inquiry whose independence is guaranteed. Deputy Pádraic McCormack: The Taoiseach must have been expecting the question. The Taoiseach: That method of inquiry has worked well in the past, most recently in the context of the Murphy report. The commission of investigation has been provided by the 568 Leaders’ 20 January 2010. Questions Oireachtas with all the powers the Oireachtas believes are necessary to enable it to investigate a matter of significant public concern. The tight timeline for the work will ensure the report of the commission is available to the Oireachtas for further consideration and action as quickly as possible thereafter. That method of inquiry has been supported and a law passed by the Oireachtas which some Members now seem to claim constitutes a whitewash. The third stage involves the consideration of the report by the Oireachtas and action by an appropriate Oireachtas committee. The suggestion that the inquiry is a whitewash because hearings will be in private makes no sense. It is the findings and recommendations that are of importance. These will be published, considered and debated. Those that make the allegation of a whitewash are really complaining that not every wild allegation can be published or proffered. The public are interested in balanced findings that ascertain what went wrong and provide guidance as to how mistakes can be avoided in the future. We have outlined a means by which an independent statutory inquiry can take place by assembling the facts through the reports that will be done by the governor and an indepen- dent expert, and to proceed thereafter as the Oireachtas sees fit. Deputy Pádraic McCormack: The reports will be censored. Deputy Seymour Crawford: Where are the Greens? Deputy Enda Kenny: It may well be that the governor of the Central Bank, a person to whom no fault can be imputed, wants an inquiry because the Central Bank was obviously centrally involved in this. I want to ask the Taoiseach two further questions. First, he said that when the commission of investigation completes its work, it will all be done in private. The findings of the commission of investigation, as the Taoiseach said, will be published, considered and debated by the Oireachtas committee, presumably under the control of a Fianna Fáil chairman. What is the function of that consideration if, for example, somebody produces evidence of a “deep throat” nature that was not considered by the commission of investigation? Will the Oireachtas com- mittee have the opportunity and responsibility for further investigation, if necessary? Will it be in a position to change the published findings of the commission of investigation if such evi- dence were to come forward? Second, my contention is that, under the current structure, neither the Taoiseach, Mr. Charlie McCreevy or Deputy Bertie Ahern, as people involved in the Department of Finance and high political