Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

This Bill has been introduced as a stage in implementing EU legislation on money laundering. As Deputy Flanagan noted, it is at a late stage. We are passing it through the House now, following a European Court of Justice judgment against Ireland on this matter and a formal notice served earlier this year. I have pointed out several times that we must look to how we manage legislation in the House. I realise a committee is examining Dáil reform and how the House operates. We must deal with legislation in a properly organised manner so that we do not spend many months without any significant legislative work while at other times trying to rush legislation through at the end of year.

This is a justice Bill. I am the Labour Party spokesperson on the environment and I know there are many cases in train against Ireland in respect of the non-implementation or transposition of European environmental law. The Government must deal with this issue. There is a great deal of cynicism about politics, most of which is unjustified. However, much of it has to do with how the Oireachtas operates. People take the view that one of our main functions is to be legislators. We must manage how we pass legislation through the House so that we do so in an efficient and timely manner and on the basis of relevance. The Government should ensure that whatever resources are required for legal drafting are provided. It is a very important of our role and it is important we are resourced properly in that regard.

We are at one stage of this legislative process; there were previous stages and I understand this is the third legislative measure to try to implement these rules. The attempt began with the Criminal Justice Bill in 1994. In terms of our day to day lives, the money laundering legislation passed to date in this country has impacted on the banks and how we all deal with banks in our daily lives. Banks have changed with regard to how they deal with the ordinary public, sometimes not necessarily for the better because they have become much more restrictive in their dealings with the ordinary customer who uses a bank account for salary and mortgage purposes. When we want to open an account we must bring certain documentation to the bank that was not required in the past. I cannot cash a cheque in the bank but must lodge it. There are many more restrictions in my dealings with my bank and that is how most people are affected by the changes in banking practice. I realise that is all necessary and is aimed at preventing criminal behaviour, especially money laundering.

On the other side of the spectrum, while this has all been happening and the European Union and Ireland have been putting all these measures in place to try to deal with money laundering and related criminal activity, it must be pointed out that all the problems created in our financial system, our banks and our economy are not due to the activities of organised criminals. They are not due to the activities of people such as us who deal normally with the banks but are because of financial speculation that was promoted by the banks and facilitated by many Government policies. Much of the activity in question has not been regulated. This is one type of activity among many that should be addressed but are not currently considered as crimes, despite being reckless and the cause of great inequality and deprivation, given the changes being made in public expenditure and so on. Deepening inequality will lead to even more crime and moneylaundering if the Government continues with its approach.

In a way, we are always trying to catch up with the latest initiatives by criminals to launder money without getting caught. We are introducing significant legislative measures to deal with criminals, but it is also important that we address something that we do not currently regard as a crime, including the lack of regulation of banks' day-to-day activities that brought the country to its knees.

I will quote from an article in The Times written by Sir Ken MacDonald QC that I read this morning. He is a member of the Matrix Chambers and was Britain's Director of Public Prosecutions from 2003 to 2008. He spoke of how banks have not been regulated. He wrote:

If you mug someone in the street and you are caught, the chances are that you will go to prison. In recent years mugging someone out of their savings or their pension would probably earn you a yacht.

This is the type of country that we have allowed to flourish here. It is similar to what has occurred in Britain and elsewhere, so we are not the only ones to have allowed it. It is a European issue. We need Europe to regulate banks, so as that legitimate activities that were nevertheless reckless, endangered our economy and brought it to its knees are not permitted.

The Minister could take on board something else stated by Sir Ken MacDonald:

In Britain we had an additional burden: legislators who preferred criminal justice to be an auction of fake toughness, so long as the toughness was not too tough to design. So no one likes terrorists [this is relevant to the Bill]? Let's bring in lots of terror laws, the tougher the better. Let's lock up nasty people longer, and for longer before they are charged .... And they didn't want to tackle the more complex issues that really affect safety in people's lives. It was easier to throw increasingly illiberal sound bites at a shadowy and fearsome enemy.

Nothing was being done about financial speculation.

See this speech in context