Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and the Minister of State for their attendance at short notice. It is much appreciated. I take this opportunity to again wish the Minister of State good luck. Previously, he was Chairman of this committee but he is on the other side of the room today.

The Minister stated, "I find it greatly troubling that, were it not for the events of last August, these failings may never have come to light." That is true. It is a sad reflection on ourselves and on our own checks and balances that we relied upon another jurisdiction that probably would not be held up in the highest esteem for being the most honourable in terms of doing business. Yet it took that jurisdiction to highlight the gross inadequacies of the OCI. The Minister also alluded to the fact that Mr. Hickey showed contempt by not agreeing to an independent investigation into what went on prior to his arrest. It took the Minister's request to Mr. Mulvey to get an independent person on that board. The Minister seems to have been agreeable, by virtue of what he has said here, that the independent investigation could have proceeded or that the OCI could have investigated itself, albeit with an independent person on the board, had it not been for the arrest of Mr. Hickey. What was said to the Minister in Rio that alleviated his fears such that - according to what he has said - he would have agreed to the investigation proceeding were it not for the arrest of Mr. Hickey?

The Minister also said that he returned to Ireland subsequent to the arrest of Mr. Hickey and convened a meeting on 19 August to decide on the next steps to be taken. That meeting was attended by the Attorney General, a number of senior officials and a Minister of State. The Minister said, "We agreed to establish a non-statutory inquiry." On 23 August, the Minister requested that this committee make suggestions in terms of the type of inquiry to be established. It seemed that was labour in vain because, according to the Minister, the Government had formulated its opinion at that stage. The Minister tried to alleviate the fears of those of us on this side in terms of the need for a statutory inquiry and he insisted that the key players were going to co-operate. He insisted that a non-statutory inquiry was needed in order that the report could be delivered in a timely fashion. On both fronts, the Minister was wrong. The original timeframe relating to the inquiry was 12 weeks but almost 12 months have elapsed. All key stakeholders were to co-operate but, in fact, only one did so. That stakeholder co-operated because it relies on the State for part of its funding. What assurances had the Minister sought or received that enabled him to state that he was confident that all key stakeholders would co-operate fully in advance of the inquiry's establishment last year?

The Minister also stated, "The lack of co-operation has happily not undermined the inquiry." I do not want to be negative about the good work that Mr. Justice Moran has done. However, he has said that the lack of co-operation imposed a major impediment on the inquiry. We do not know the details relating to the money trail. We do not know who was able to purchase tickets. Were it not for the extensive email evidence obtained from the OCI, we would not know anything more either. That gives rise to my next question.

Regarding the Grant Thornton inquiry into the OCI that was in the process of going through the email evidence and presenting it in a report, had it been the only inquiry conducted, would we know what we do today without having incurred the expense of the non-statutory inquiry?

Mr. Hickey has indicated his wish to return to the IOC. What is the Minister's opinion in that regard? Should Mr. Hickey be enabled to return to that position? His current status is described as self-suspension. In his absence, Ireland has no representative at that level of the IOC. Has the Minister spoken to the OCI about a replacement for Mr. Hickey?

The Minister has spoken of an unknown rotten culture at the heart of the OCI. All present would agree with him. He has highlighted shameful standards of corporate governance. Is he satisfied that there continues to be an OCI board member in situ who served during Mr. Hickey's presidency? It is the job and duty of all board members to hold the president to account and that should have been done while Mr. Hickey was president.

When did the Minister become aware that the contract between the OCI and THG is to remain in place until 2026? Has he been informed how much the OCI has spent on Mr. Hickey's legal fees?

On the investigation under way in Brazil, has the Minister spoken to the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Charles Flanagan, about how he might deal with a possible application for Mr. Hickey's extradition to Brazil should he fail to return there to answer potential charges? Has the Minister considered referring the matter to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement?