Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I wish to respond to the Minister of State and to speak to amendment No. 70 because it is in this group and then we can proceed. I am genuinely surprised by the Minister of State's response because, on the one hand, he seems to be saying that there is a provision elsewhere in the Bill for annual reports, but the provision that there would be an initial annual report and then a report every five years seems to contradict that. Perhaps he could explain the position because it could be the case that I do not understand the relationship between the two relevant sections of the Bill.

I find it incredible that anybody would be against the publication of an annual report by any State agency, commercial or non-commercial, that is going to be spending substantial sums of taxpayers' money and engaging in substantial land and residential property deals with other State agencies and potentially with commercial actors, depending on what happens. That is surprising given all the difficulties we have had, for example, with NAMA, and the lack of accountability and transparency and subsequently the very significant charges that deals were done without the adequate level of attention to the public interest. We only get access to that information when it comes to light several years later, either in the Comptroller and Auditor General's look-back report or through good investigative journalism. Surely, if the Government wants the public to have confidence in this new agency, the publication of an annual report and the maximum level of transparency would be a good thing.

Amendment No. 70 relates to a requirement for the Minister to put in the public domain information regarding directions to the agency within 30 days of those directions, as opposed to "as soon as practicable", which is the wording in the Bill. Again, the public and Opposition and backbench Government Deputies need to have access to the maximum level of information about the operations of this agency to protect the public interest. That is our job, and I can see no reason for the Minister of State to oppose that amendment either.