Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)

I begin by genuinely wishing the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, and the Minister of State, Deputy Penrose, every success in their new positions. I hope we trained the Minister of State well on the previous Joint Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Innovation for the burden of office ahead.

It is a shame that the Minister begins office by having this landed on him and I hope it does not take away from the focus on the other important work the Department has to do. The striking feature of the report is the definitive nature of its findings. The judge has pulled no punches in the manner in which he has constructed the report. In a profession which is known for long language and words, the judge has gone back to basics. When reading the report, one is struck by the amount of time and effort he put in to proving his conclusions.

Last night I listened to Deputy Lowry who absolutely and passionately disagrees with the report. The same can be said for some of the other protagonists not in the House. It strikes me that we need a system for the independent adjudication of future disputes. It also strikes me in reading the report that it has been shown by Mr. Justice Moriarty that there was at the time a wrong relationship between the then Minister, Deputy Lowry, and certain protagonists. We need to ensure this did not affect other issues or contracts in the Department at the time. I refer specifically to the mini-CTC project inqiry, of which Deputy Rabbitte was a member and which was halted a result of the Abbeylara judgment.

The Abbeylara judgment needs to be finally dealt with once and for all. We have a date with the electorate next October for the Presidential election and it would be in our interests and those of the profession of politics, doing business in this country and proper parliamentary democracy if we were in a position on that date in October to present a referendum to the people on dealing with the Abbeylara judgment and whatever else needs to be dealt with to have a properly empowered committee system. We do not need to return to a situation where the work of the House is done in Dublin Castle; where it takes 14 years to complete; where it is challenged through the courts by people who have resources to do so and where after 14 years the work and reputation of every Member of the House, whether we like it and whether we were mentioned in the report, is sullied.

When the Minister is answering questions this evening, I would like to hear his thoughts on how we will proceed. During the time of the previous Government he stated he did not fully accept that the Abbeylara judgment blocked every inquiry. If he believes it does not do so, is it possible to proceed with the mini-CTC inquiry in order that we can draw a line under this episode also, particularly given the findings of the Moriarty tribunal report and that, to a certain extent, the same protagonists are involved? If it is the feeling of the Government that we can proceed with this inquiry, regardless of the Abbeylara case decision, it should be done immediately so as to move away and move on from this scenario.

The Government has challenged itself to produce a jobs budget within 100 days of 9 March. With all of the discussion on the Moriarty tribunal, it may be easy to forget that this is the number one priority. Equally, the House should give itself deadlines on the recommendations made in the Moriarty tribunal report. Within 100 days of 22 March, the date on which the report was published, the House should implement the various recommendations to which Deputy McGrath referred with regard to funding, strengthening the role of the Standards in Public Office Commission and the disclosure of small donations, including, ironically enough in the context of this discussion, to independent candidates and Deputies. Surely we have it within ourselves to implement those proceedings within 100 days of 22 March so that as Members of the 31st Dáil we can say we are drawing a line under the actions of a very few. I know many Members from all sides who were also in the previous Dáil. Moreover, knowing that many people the length and breadth of the country are elected as public servants and work in the interests of their country and their community, I am annoyed that we are all tarred with the same brush. It is a case of, "You are all at it". Until we draw a line under this report then we are subject to that charge. As Members of this Dáil we owe it to the many hundreds of people who have sat in this Chamber since the First Dáil, representing the interests of their community and their country. They went about their business and did their job to the best of their ability, not only in an intellectual sense but also and more important, in the moral sense. We owe it to them to draw a line under all of this culture. I know my party is up there as much as anyone else but as a Dáil we should unite in some way to draw a line and ensure this will never happen again. The reputations of 99% of those who have served in this House or who have served in council chambers around the country, can never again be sullied by the remark, "You are all at it". It is time, once and for all, to draw a line under this culture.

Mr. Justice Moriarty has given us a road map but it needs the practical input of politicians. I ask that the Ceann Comhairle consider instituting the commission as soon as possible and giving it the specific task of responding to the findings and recommendations. The Government's legislative programme will be published next Tuesday. I hope a deadline will be imposed for the implementation of legislation in the House before, hopefully, the Government will decide to put a referendum on committee confidentiality to the people in October.

I refer to the issue of those who have let down our profession and the lack of any power of the House to censure them. A motion of censure can be tabled and I believe such a motion will be debated next week but ultimately this means nothing as it will not cost such a person a cent of salary or expenses and, at this stage, any cost in terms of public standing. In the context of examining the Abbeylara judgment, the House should consider whether there are constitutional blockages to the House having the power to expel a Member. Such a power could be dependent on a two thirds or higher majority. Given the kind of majority being won now, I accept that safeguards will be necessary to stop such a power being abused. We have surely had enough incidences in the past number of years of individual Deputies and Senators letting down the Houses that it is time to resolve to put in place a process to enable such people to be expelled from the House, to enable the House to stand up for itself.

I was intrigued by the Minister's response to Deputy Michael McGrath as to what happened at the time and the role of the Cabinet. The contract in question was the biggest commercial contract in the State. I do not refer in particular to the individual members of the Cabinet at the time but there must be a process in Cabinet which does more than note a recommendation. I have not been a member of a Cabinet but in the case of major commercial or social decisions which will have an impact on the commercial revenue of the State - in this case there is also the impact of disaffected bidders - there must be greater security and greater involvement of the Cabinet so that checks and balances can be guaranteed. This report illustrates the need for such a process which is a concrete action the political profession could take. Since 1995, Cabinets have been faced with decisions which led to significant consequences. It is clear that Cabinet procedures in general need to be revised in order to be brought up to date to deal with our modern times. I suggest such a revision could be completed relatively quickly, given all-party agreement.

I note that tomorrow's business includes statements on the role of committees. I recently read the minutes of the former committee dealing with the mini-CTC project. This committee was making progress along the lines of the DIRT inquiry but it suddenly came to a halt. I suggest that the Government sets up properly resourced committees. We learned from the experience of the 30th Dáil that more is not necessarily better and that Members spent their time every Wednesday trying to attend every meeting but without the time to undertake proper research. I was fortunate to serve on the Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Innovation under the Minister of State, Deputy Willie Penrose. Members of that committee left party affiliations outside the door when necessary and we went about our business but this was not the case for every committee. The committees took on too much work without sufficient research resources. The point of a good, effective committee structure is that when an issue such as the current one arises, it will not take 14 years to come up with a comprehensive response. A good committee structure will allow us as elected parliamentarians with mandates to take charge of our own affairs within the House, to make an input into Government policy or into general public debate in a properly resourced and managed function. It was the absence of such properly resourced and managed function that has led to the 14-year delay and to the most extraordinary legal bill imaginable. If that money had been put into a properly resourced committee system, we would have a much stronger democracy and Parliament today.

The House has less than 100 days to unite. The Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, will take questions tonight on the conclusion of this debate and I believe the Taoiseach will also take questions about Fine Gael. However, then the debate will be over and we will all go about our business. The House will debate the economy tomorrow and committees will be constituted and that will be the end of it until the next tribunal report and perhaps the one after that. This is what has happened up to now. We owe it to ourselves as professional politicians, if we respect our profession and if we respect those who served before us in this House, if we respect their integrity and reputation, from the publication of the report on 22 March 2011, to decide to draw a line, once and for all and to stand up for our own reputations. We have it in our power to do this and we should not waste this opportunity.

See this speech in context