Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

Deputy Kelleher makes considerable sense and has raised some valid concerns. It is good to see a Government Deputy being very objective and not simply trotting out a partisan line. I generally welcome the broad thrust of the Bill. The confidence of the public has been affected by the cost and duration of tribunals. I recall that the Government was dragged kicking and screaming into agreeing to establish the Flood tribunal. While Government spokespersons often claim it established the tribunal, it was set up by the Houses of the Oireachtas. While I had expected it to conclude within a year, the Mahon tribunal will soon be running longer then "Glenroe" or "The Riordans" and may get to rival "Coronation Street". If it were possible to copyright the tribunals, they could be turned into a bestseller in time and it might be possible to recover the money spent, if I can be light hearted about it.

Some speakers have spoken about a potential expanded role for Oireachtas committees. The Committee of Public Accounts does an excellent job. We have much for which to thank the former Deputy, the late Jim Mitchell, for the money that committee recovered. Unfortunately the public were not as gracious in their appreciation.

I became a member of the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights towards the end of the last Dáil when the sub-committee to investigate events at Abbeylara was established. I felt somewhat uneasy about that sub-committee. Despite what some Members say, it is not the role of the Oireachtas to turn us into a house of investigators like Colombo or Elliot Ness. Our role is to scrutinise legislation and keep a check on Departments. I agree with Deputy Kelleher that we could have every committee involved in sensational investigations, carrying out witch-hunts and bringing people in. Some of the questions put, especially during the Abbeylara inquiry, would make one cringe. Those with any knowledge of what happened would regard some of the questions as completely off the mark and may have put witnesses at an unfair advantage.

While there has been some very colourful language at the tribunals, nothing seems to shock us any more. This may be due to the media reporting. What we read in the Sunday newspapers seems to be like the song about the ten green bottles hanging on the wall. One is punch drunk on reaching the third paragraph because this has been seen so many times before.

There appears to be a passive acceptance of corruption in this country. I understand a local radio station carried out a survey in recent days showing that about one in five people would be willing to make a corrupt payment to get planning permission. I do not know whether this shows that 20% of us are corrupt or that we have very difficult planning laws. Like many others eight or nine years ago, I believed that much of what we were hearing was no more than unsubstantiated rumour. However, much of it was true. I have no doubt that some corrupt politicians still exist just as there are corrupt members of any organisation or facet of society. However, politicians should be above reproach and seen to be so, as we deal with money and should have the trust of the public.

When a politician is found to be corrupt there is an expectation that we are all corrupt. I have a theory in this regard. I believe that when the corrupt politician is making his or her hit off the person handing over the money, he or she creates the impression that he or she has to get the money to pay other politicians or officials. This is why those making the payments believe corruption is so widespread, but this is not so.

One of the downsides of the tribunals is that they have allowed some people to circulate rumours and bad-mouth politicians and people in society at large. There is nothing the public like more than a bad story about someone that they can relay to others. While I cannot comment about other places, in my county of Wicklow I could spend all week denying rumours I hear about myself or others. I expend considerable negative energy doing things I should not be doing.

It is very difficult to put a stop to this, as in the first instance the person making the corrupt payment is guilty. How can we get to the bottom of this? Garda inquiries and Oireachtas inquiries have been shown to be relatively ineffective. While the tribunals are costly, slow and painstaking, they have been relatively effective. While it is not addressed in this Bill, the Minister has referred to extending the role of the Criminal Assets Bureau so that it is more pro-active. It can be taken that those with money for which they cannot account got that money by unfair means and certainly did not pay tax on it. We need to hit these people in the pocket.

It is very difficult to get someone to come forward with prima facie evidence or information that a person is corrupt. A few weeks ago I spoke about having an amnesty. I am somewhat uneasy about amnesties as they had a bad reputation in the past. There are many people who gave payments to officials or politicians to do something in the belief that this was the only way to get it done.

These people do not believe they have done anything wrong and they will not come forward with information because they are afraid they will be targeted. The Bill refers to privacy. I do not know if it would be possible to extend to those to whom I refer an amnesty of some kind or some sort of anonymity or privacy which would provide them with protection if they come forward with evidence that leads to the seizure of assets or the prosecution of politicians or officials. It is easy to suggest such mechanisms but I do not know whether they would be easy to operate. Until such time as they are put in place, however, there will always be a whiff of corruption. It is sad that those who are corrupt are the very ones who surf on the wave of an outcry and make accusations about others.

A previous speaker referred to the delay with the Bill. Perhaps the Minister made a claim, be it right or wrong, that the Opposition had not co-operated in terms of facilitating the introduction of the Bill.

See this speech in context