Marc MacSharry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am delighted that the Chairman read out the letter from the relevant company. It is more than entitled to do so. Our issue as a committee is with the SBCI and the lending of money that was envisaged for a particular purpose. Of course, it will understand, as, I am sure, does the company that wrote to us does, that we have a responsibility to examine that. Many questions have been submitted and I know they will be laundered through the Office of the Parliamentary Legal Adviser tomorrow. I have not submitted my questions yet because I do not intend to have them laundered by anybody. I have my own legal advisers, who can advise on that. My analysis of this particular transaction is a matter of major concern to me. The auditors of the company that wrote to the Chairman have resigned. It is a matter of concern whether SBCI would have been aware of that at the time we were questioning about this matter. If it was not aware of it, what was the reason? Other issues do not make me comfortable that the money that was lent was lent for the purposes for which it was intended. That may be a failing, as I was at pains to point out at our previous meeting, which I know was in private. In fairness to the company in question, I am happy to say publicly that the failing may have been with the original legislation and oversight of it by the Oireachtas. It may have been failings in the legislation itself but it is our responsibility to get to the bottom of it because of the amount involved. Certainly the spirit of the legislation, which I was in the House for when it was put through, is not captured in this. There is no suggestion that the company did anything wrong but it may well be the case that SBCI or indeed Members of these Houses did. We have a responsibility to find out whether this is the case. I formally propose that notwithstanding any considerations tomorrow at our private meeting, we invite SBCI back before us to examine this transaction in detail.

Moreover, the invitation should specifically point out that we want to talk in detail about this transaction and no other. An all-encompassing invitation should be issued so that the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland representatives are in no doubt whatsoever about the need to have all details with them in respect of underwriting, due diligence and everything else in order that we can go through all of this in detail. I am afraid information given at the meeting by the SBCI representatives does not tally with the information in this letter or other information provided to me and other members of the committee.

It is a matter without prejudice to anyone. It may well be our fault - the fault of Deputies and Senators in these Houses. This requires and demands a public investigation with SBCI without prejudice to the company involved. That is our responsibility.

In advance of our private meeting tomorrow I want to put a point on the record. Parliamentary privilege exists for a reason. Sometimes, where the Legislature crosses with private society and the commercial world, it is necessary to refer to certain entities and companies and, at times, individuals. That is the very reason parliamentary privilege exists in a democracy. It is beyond ridiculous and absurd in the extreme to wall ourselves off to the extent that we cannot do our job in holding ourselves and the public purse to account. That is what I intend to do regardless of any advice tomorrow. I believe and hope colleagues will approve the proposal today. I do not want it to go to a private discussion tomorrow. I wish to formally propose that, as a matter of urgency, we bring SBCI representatives back in to discuss that transaction.