Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)

I thank the Labour Party for its exemplary whistleblowers Bill, which the Fine Gael Party supported in 1999 and continues to support. We are pleased to present a united force in the face of Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats opposition to this important Private Members' Bill.

In the debate of 15 June 1999, when the Labour Party brought the Bill to the House, Deputy Rabbitte asked a number of questions. He asked if it was credible that nobody knew or suspected that all was not well at the Blood Transfusion Service Board. Did nobody in the Department of Agriculture and Food know or suspect illegality and malpractice in the beef industry? Did nobody know or suspect the consequences of Army personnel being exposed to hearing damage? Following 30 years of serious allegations, analysis and criticism of the planning system, especially in the Dublin area, is it believable that nobody in the system ever stumbled across any wrongdoing or illegality, or any malpractice as alleged against certain financial institutions?

Many questions must be asked in light of the Government's failure to implement this Bill. Is it possible that so many medical professionals in the Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda knew nothing of the actions of Dr. Michael Neary? Is it possible that so many civil servants in the Health Service Executive saw nothing wrong in the roll-out of PPARS? Is it possible that so many local authority staff and members knew nothing of the rank corruption in and around Dublin throughout the 1980s and 1990s?

I do not need to present any evidence to this House for the necessity of this Bill because it has been in the public domain for so long. We do not wish to discuss on a regular basis in this House dodgy deals in high places, corrupt officials with too much power and shady practices in our most trusted institutions.

It is mind boggling that the Government has failed to implement the Bill despite its promise to do so. Instead it will work on a sector by sector basis to root out corruption and wrong-doing. Do the promises of this Government mean anything?

Deputy Kenny will address the House tomorrow night. He was trusted by a whistleblower in the HSE and entrusted with the task of telling the nation of the scandal of the PPARS system, which cost the taxpayer €160 million and still does not work. Where is the protection for that individual? That person, who remains anonymous to this day, should have been rewarded for his or her vigilance and not forced to keep their identity a secret. Deputy Twomey will also speak in this debate. Nobody needs to be reminded of the dreadful impact of the actions of Dr. Neary in Drogheda. It beggars belief that the Government is acting in this way one week after the truth about Dr. Neary emerged.

As Fine Gael spokesperson on enterprise, trade and employment I support the Bill and this motion. At the time Tesco was overcharging its customers at check-outs it seemed Deputy Conor Lenihan also supported such legislation. In 1999 he stated:

We must consider consumers' interests. The last few months have been characterised by various stories and allegations against banks and supermarkets relating to — and I am not suggesting it is the case, but it would appear to be — systematic skimming of the customer. This is a dangerous phenomenon and there is a need for proper enforcement to ensure it does not happen. Whistleblower legislation may prove useful in this regard.

Can the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, explain why this Government should not enact a comprehensive whistleblowers charter that would protect the workers who identify rip-off merchants and those who work against consumers' interests?

During that same debate Fine Gael stated this legislation should include some supports for employees so that they can obtain confidential legal advice on whether they should progress further a complaint. We want to see safeguards to ensure spurious claims are avoided. Such protection is important and can be adopted on Committee Stage. It would be better if the employee could be assured the complaint had substance by obtaining the advice of a third party. Other jurisdictions have whistleblower hotlines that people can contact to ask if a certain practice should be reported. There is no point in passing this legislation if the employee is left hanging out to dry.

The definition of employees contained in the 1984 Act would exclude many people, including students. If a student in a third level institution discovers something is radically wrong, will he or she be protected if the whistle is blown? This area is covered in the equivalent British legislation and should be examined.

Revelations of sharp practice, overcharging and daylight robbery in our banks brought shame to the industry but were vital to ensuring trust was restored and consumers got a fair deal. AIB and National Irish Bank were at the centre of this storm over the past years. National Irish Bank was in the spotlight for a litany of sins, ranging from overcharging customers to assisting them to evade taxes. AIB, Ireland's largest financial institution, issued three reports detailing how it overcharged customers by more than €34 million. The Revenue Commissioners also investigated offshore investments used by former chief executives and other senior management, prompting many observers to conclude that its culture is rotten to the core.

Currency converter machines used by bank staff to calculate transactions had been adjusted to reduce the rate of commission charged from one percentage point to 0.5 of a percentage point, in the days before IFSRA contacted the bank. The Irish Times reported the bank confirmed that staff working on the foreign exchange counters were not informed why the machines were altered. Had the error not been made public, it is likely that these customers would never have known they had been overcharged.

The Irish Bank Officials Association, IBOA, said its members were demoralised and disgusted to learn of what happened. The revelations about wrongdoing at AIB and NIB were brought to public attention by staff who reported such misdeeds. They felt unable to raise these matters within their organisations and sought to highlight them through the media or the regulator. Mr. Larry Broderick, general secretary of IBOA, told the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service that bank employees are working in a culture of fear and are frightened of speaking out on virtually any issue for fear it will damage their career prospects.

How does the Government respond to these employees? What does it say to the 1,000 bank workers who voluntarily leave jobs once considered safe and well paid? The attitude of the Government is that of a firefighter who will come to the scene of an emergency rather than attempting to prevent that emergency. It is short-sighted, illogical and wrong.

Professional self-regulation must be examined as this is not working in the interests of consumers. I welcomed Government legislation to set up an oversight body for the accountancy profession. The Irish Auditing and Accountancy Supervisory Authority, IAASA, is an improvement on self-regulation in the accountancy and auditing professions. The Blaney inquiry has taught us much about those professions.

We must consider if something similar can be applied to the medical and legal professions. Too many examples exist of consumers being short-changed due to over-reliance on a self-regulatory regime where people within the profession are examining the misdeeds of the profession's members. Neither the customer nor the country can have confidence in such an arrangement, particularly in light of the Neary case.

The Labour Party Bill and the Labour and Fine Gael motion presented to the House deserve support from all parties. This is an attempt to ensure ordinary decent people do their civic duty in a genuine fashion without facing penalties. The Government has stated it will take a sector by sector approach. This approach may have good intentions but sectors will be left out. Will it always take a scandal for that sector to reach the Government radar? The wrongdoers have had their chance. The Government has had sufficient time since 1999 to consider this matter and I ask it to consider ways of progressing this motion in the interests of the taxpayer and of the people working in the public and Civil Service.

See this speech in context