Shane Cassells (Meath West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We are on the cusp of the voting block in the Dáil so I will cut to the main topic I wish to discuss and try to finish before the division bells ring. I welcome the Chairman, as always. Earlier, he stated on flat rate allowances that because the Minister had written to Mr. Cody and Mr. Cody responded, and that the Revenue was leaving the matter awaiting a further response. The Minister put on the record of the Dáil that he had written to Revenue during questions to the Minister for Finance two weeks ago. He went further by stating why he had done so. He said he was simply seeking first, the number of employees impacted, second, the cost to Revenue and third, the benefit to each employee group so that he could have "a clearer understanding of the scale of [the] change that may ensue". He did not have to go to that bother as the Irish Independenthad published a two-page special this time last year, breaking down exactly the number of employees by sector, using colourful graphs and the costs involved. This made me wonder why the Minister, who was at pains to say it was done at his arm's length and was purely Revenue's baby, is simultaneously writing to Revenue seeking information that the Irish Independenthas published in graphic form. From a political perspective, I would suggest the Minister is trying to look as though he is concerned so he wrote to Mr. Cody. I cannot expect Mr. Cody to comment on the inference I have drawn from what I perceive to be a charade, I can ask him to comment on the Taoiseach's position, who was surprisingly blunt in his view when I questioned him in the Dáil on 17 September. I put it to him that there had been a backing away from the issue this time last year because of the intense media coverage. The Taoiseach responded:

This is a matter for the Revenue Commissioners, not the Government. However, I would be very happy if the [Revenue] just left matters as they stand.

That is some statement from the Head of Government saying that he would like the Revenue Commissioners to leave things as they are, while at the same time saying that he has nothing to do with it. Will the Chairman comment?