Pearse Doherty (Donegal South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I do not see a huge problem with the duplication, and I think it is good in principle that people appeal to an independent body. However, given the resources that Mr. O'Callaghan's office has, I can understand the concern he would have about even a limited amount of additional bureaucracy.

The last thing I want to ask concerns public hearings. There was discussion here about whether hearings should be held in camera.

I am in favour of having hearings in public. It has been mentioned to me, and Mr. O'Callaghan made the point, about people's concerns about having their issues disclosed and having to argue in public, although there are many exemptions in the legislation whereby the commissioner could hold a hearing in camera. In a situation in which somebody from Revenue has not treated a person as fairly as he or she should, would the fact that the in camerarule is gone facilitate Revenue officials to be more considerate in their approach in the knowledge that all the documentation could come before a public appeals court? I am not suggesting this is happening. Today, the Financial Services Ombudsman published a report which stated that the significant drop in the number of people who have made appeals was a result of the legislation for naming and shaming that had been passed, because financial institutions resolved cases before they went to appeal. Could the same apply to the Revenue Commissioners?