Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)

The lessons of the years since the beef tribunal are that the Oireachtas has frequently had resort to tribunals of inquiry and other investigations at enormous cost and with mixed results; that there are, at the same time, matters of public interest which must be inquired into and should not be susceptible only to a cost benefit analysis; that there is no desirability or obligation that only one method of inquiry be used; that alternatives to the conventional public inquiry under the 1921 Act are necessary; and that inquiry by parliamentary committee in certain circumstances is one such necessary alternative.

Unfortunately, this Bill seems to signal that the Minister and the Government are quietly resolved, for whatever reason, that there will never be another DIRT style inquiry by parliamentary committee, which shall not be one of the alternatives to the conventional tribunal of inquiry. The reason the Government, particularly the Minister, has decided to kill off inquiry by parliamentary committee is puzzling. The DIRT inquiry was an acknowledged success, while the mini-CTC inquiry would have been successfully concluded had it not been derailed by the Supreme Court decision on the Abbeylara inquiry.

The Minister knows better than I that the decision on Abbeylara did not forbid inquiry by parliamentary committee, except in the event that particular outcomes could arise. On reflection, most Members of the House would agree that Abbeylara was not appropriate to inquiry by politicians. However, just as this Bill acknowledges that in some instances public inquiry by tribunal under the 1921 Act will still be inevitable, similarly, instances will arise in which inquiry by parliamentary committee will not only be appropriate, but necessary for Dáil Éireann properly to discharge its duties.

The task of parliamentarians is often described as being to legislate. The late Mr. Justice Liam Hamilton described it in different terms in a ruling in the course of the beef tribunal, when he stated: "It is, inter alia, the duty of the Members of the Oireachtas to elect a Government, to legislate and to look diligently into every affair of Government. It is meant to be the eyes and the voice and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents and to inform and be informed by them." As we currently organise our affairs, we are not performing that duty.

As my colleague. Deputy Costello, stated yesterday in this debate, the Labour Party supports the thrust of the Bill, in so far as it goes. We would have very much welcomed its earlier introduction because its delay has been the main reason some crucially important matters have gone without necessary investigation. I refer, in particular, to the need to investigate serious allegations surrounding the handling of sexual abuse cases in the Diocese of Dublin.

The Minister has implied to groups and individuals who are deeply concerned about this issue that while this legislation is a major priority for him, the Opposition has in some way been tardy in enabling the legislation to come before the House. As the Minister knows, nothing could be further from the truth. He appears to be completely unaware of the transformation he has undergone since leaving the Opposition and joining Government. In opposition, the Minister asserted his right to question, advocate and scrutinise measures which came before the House. Since entering Government, however, his view has been that the role of the Opposition is to automatically dispatch his Bills without query or scrutiny. He is genuinely completely unaware of the transformation which has befallen him.

See this speech in context