Martin Cullen (Waterford, Fianna Fail)

I wish to share time with Deputy Conor Lenihan. The Tribunal to Inquire into Certain Planning Matters and Payments, established by the Oireachtas has today, as it has had for the last ten years, all the resources, powers and independence it requires to complete its work. In his speech opening the debate Deputy Kenny clearly outlined that he and his party have no difficulty prejudging the tribunal's findings. At the same time, without a hint of irony, he suggested that any Minister raising a question is a "boot boy" who is "intimidating" the tribunal. Fine Gael has also denounced as "sinister" statements which come nowhere near the type of criticisms levelled by judges of the High Court and Supreme Court.

The course of this debate has confirmed the suspicion that Fine Gael's motion is all about politics and nothing to do with a genuine concern that the tribunal be free to fulfil its terms of reference. This superficial and complacent motion betrays the motivation of a party which is desperate for others to achieve for it what three leaders have failed to do. Only in the completion of its work and the publication of its final report will we be able to form a real judgment on the tribunal. In the interim, Members of this House are entitled to raise concerns if they so choose. To seek to gag them with the idea that such questions interfere with the tribunal is ludicrous.

The largest and most consistent attempt to undermine the tribunal has been from those who have sought to manipulate its proceedings in different ways, including through the near decade-long selective leaking of documents. The tribunal has heard evidence of it receiving allegations culled from media reports and passed off as first-hand. It has heard of a principal witness being used by a journalist to pass on rumours in the form of allegations. It has confirmed the receipt of forged material designed to back up a false allegation. In concluding its work, and to demonstrate that it has been balanced, the tribunal will have to pay attention to these and other examples of the abuse and manipulation of its proceedings. The tribunal should also explain how it can justify bringing The Irish Times to the Supreme Court and threatening its journalists with jail over one leak when no action is being taken to follow up the tidal wave of leaks printed by others. A circulation policy which all but guarantees these leaks requires either amendment or a better justification than has been provided.

All parties agree that the cost of the tribunal is excessive. It is a pity that the new lower daily rates which former Minister Charlie McCreevy proposed were not accepted by the tribunal's personnel. However, we would today be hearing even louder attacks if the Government had insisted on these new rates to such an extent that the personnel had resigned. The solution to the obvious shortcomings of the tribunal on cost and duration is to be found in the Bill published by the last Government. It is only by enacting it that we will have the right framework for ensuring that inquiries on serious public matters can be carried out more effectively in future.

See this speech in context