Dáil debates

Wednesday, 17 February 2010

Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Powers of Inquiry) Bill 2010: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

7:00 pm

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I am pleased to speak immediately after Deputy Ardagh, who chaired the justice sub-committee on the Abbeylara incident and on which I had the pleasure to serve. I fully agree with his assertion that it was bizarre that the presumption that we would breach the constitutional rights of citizens was argued out before we even embarked on our work. An imposition on that sub-committee and all future work of the Oireachtas flowed from that supposition, which I believe was wrong.

This is one of those debates where people outside think it is an insiders' debate about the procedures of this House and how we conduct our business. It is one of the most important debates because it is about how public business is done and whether we in this House can do the business we are sent to do, and whether the erosion of confidence in political systems can be addressed by the Members of this current Dáil. I am often fearful that this is not the case. The ability of Members to do the people's business effectively is a question that the public is asking now. The answer that we give in 45 minutes to this Bill will form part of the people's conclusions. If we vote down this Bill, we will timidly say that we cannot push back the boundaries of our proper duty, that we will be circumscribed in our job by the actions of others, and that we will not assert the rights given to us by the people of Ireland to do our business.

Have these Houses the ability to hold inquires, specifically inquiries that might be critical of individuals? We clearly do not have such an ability. We are not a court of law. We do not make findings of fact about people who are not Members of this House. However, there are other important works into which we must inquire in order to inform the main duty of this House, which is our duty to be legislators. How can we provide good law if we have not the power to see the effect of laws? How can we carry out our other duty - to hold the Executive to account - if we cannot inquire into the conduct of people who work for the Executive? How can we carry out our third duty - to scrutinise the spending of money properly voted in the House - if we cannot hold public authorities to account and inquire into their actions, be they the Garda Síochána or any other agent of the State? How do we do our duty as the people's tribune in ensuring that no agent of the State oppresses the rights of others? We have the duty to shape the laws and to serve the citizens, yet we have allowed ourselves to be pushed back in my time in this Dáil.

The official Government response outlined last night by the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, is profoundly disappointing. It was timid and the notion that the Bill "did not fully consider and address the important matters raised in the Supreme Court in the Abbeylara decision" is unacceptable. He stated that the Opposition has not fully analysed the implications of the decision after eight years. In his conclusion, he stated that the Bill "does not provide a complete solution, and further consideration needs to be given". Nobody is suggesting it is a complete solution, but nobody could deny that it is a significant advance. Let us assert the rights of the people who send us here to carry out a proper inquiry in a constitutional way. If we need to broaden the parameters of that right, let us seek that mandate from the people and not shy away from it. Let us debate this Bill on Committee Stage by allowing it to pass Second Stage. Let the advice of the Attorney General come to bear on it on Committee Stage. At the end of the day, if we conclude that a referendum is needed as several members of the Government have claimed, then let us not shy away from that. Let us put that question to the people if we have to do so.

The scope, the power and the authority of this House has been diminished over the years by decisions of the courts, who have on occasions taken it upon themselves to act as legislators. They have sometimes done this reluctantly, due to the inaction or timidity of this House in shying away from sensitive but important issues. We have also been diminished by the actions of the Executive. I say this with all the passion that I can muster now. In recent years, the Executive has seen this place as little more than a rubber stamp or a cipher. If we are not to be seen by the people as entirely irrelevant, it is time we take a stand to re-establish the authority and the power of the people's Chamber. This is but one of the many initiatives that we need to make.

There is a notion that we on this side of the House want reform and power and that when we migrate over to the other side, we will want to delimit the authority to do the people's business here. We have to get over that now and set out a proper structure where we can do the people's business. In the proposal before us tonight, the Government cannot announce that it is a bystander. It is almost eight years since the decision was handed down in the Abbeylara case. We have done nothing constructively to address the difficulties imposed on this House to do proper work in those intervening eight years. The current Government has been in power all this time, so its members cannot now say that a proper, thoughtful and carefully crafted attempt by my party to rebuild the powers of this House given by the people are unacceptable and then offer no alternative. There were no suggestions in speeches from the Government side that it is seized of this issue and wants to provide its own mechanism, proposals or legislation to allow for the proper inquiry and scrutiny that falls to all parliaments.

When the decision was handed down in the Abbeylara case a tribunal of inquiry was established. While the tribunal did good work, it took years to complete and cost millions. The timeframe of the Oireachtas inquiry into the Abbeylara case, which would have been as effective as the tribunal of inquiry, was 12 weeks. People also want efficiency in how business is done. The delays and costs involved mean there is no incentive to hold further tribunals of inquiry, except in the most grave of circumstances.

A great deal of proper scrutiny will continue to be left undone due to a lack of proper facilities in this House. Let us take responsibility and pass Second Stage of this legislative measure when the opportunity arises at 8.30 p.m. We can then refine the Bill to the best of our ability and, in so doing, signal to those who are watching closely that the Oireachtas can do business and that we are determined to reform the way in which we work in order that this Parliament is made more effective in their name.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.