Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

It is very difficult to find words which would adequately condemn the type of behaviour outlined in this report, and previous ones, from the planning tribunal. It is a sorry tale of greed and betrayal, evasion and mendacity. It is a story of those elected to public office who had no sense of public duty nor a recognisable moral compass. It is a story of those who perceived public office as an opportunity for self-service rather than public service. While it has to be acknowledged that two Fine Gael councillors were found by Judge Mahon to have received corrupt payments, substantially the story of corruption is a Fianna Fáil story.

To ensure public confidence in our political institutions it is important that no individual uses political office to obtain secret personal financial benefit from third parties in circumstances in which, even if the payment received is not corrupt, there can be any perception of the receipt of such payment undermining his or her capacity to make an independent individual judgment in the area of public affairs or which gives rise to any public perception that his or her capacity to do so has been undermined or in any way contaminated.

To have the honour to be elected to public office brings with it solemn obligations to serve the public interest. The central democratic value in holding electoral office is not only to be free but to be perceived to be free to make decisions in the public interest. In any ordinary meaning of the word it is frankly treasonous to use public office for corrupt gain. It is not only plainly wrong but utterly undermines the credibility of our democratic institutions and breeds widespread cynicism and distrust of those who behave honourably.

I note the speech of the Fianna Fáil leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, yesterday on the Mahon report. I constantly marvel at the utter lack of any sense of shame on the part of Deputy Martin and other Fianna Fáil Members who sat in Cabinet or who provided support from the Fianna Fáil back benches for those people in a leadership position in Fianna Fáil condemned by the report. It is as if they lived in a parallel universe oblivious to the revelations of recent years that received widespread publicity and were known to the dogs in the street well in advance of the publication of the Mahon report. Deputies Martin, Ó Cuív, O'Dea and others, both individually and collectively, stood by those who they now publically claim to condemn. The truth is that, while they are guilty of no personal wrongdoing, the political judgment shown by them in this area during their time in Government is deeply and fundamentally flawed. For Deputies Martin, Ó Cuív, O'Dea and others, whether it be the tribunal revelations or the disastrous economic and fiscal legacy for which they are responsible, there is a complete failure to acknowledge responsibility for either acts or omissions. It is as if the concept of collective Cabinet responsibility never existed. Rather than engaging in his daily knockabout Punch and Judy Show in this House, Deputy Martin would better serve his party and the country if he refrained from asinine headline seeking criticism of action taken by Government to address the enormous difficulties with which the State and our people are confronted as a consequence of failures for which he is collectively responsible from his time in Government. It is extraordinary that it has still not dawned on members of Fianna Fáil that over a 15 year period that party showed such deeply flawed judgment when in office that there is no reason to believe the judgment shown today in opposition is any less flawed.

People are entitled to wonder how many reports must there be before people face up to their responsibilities. The plain truth is that despite fine words of condemnation by some people following earlier reports from the tribunal, there was no genuine recognition that things would have to change nor, it seems now, was there any real intention that they would change. What else could explain what happened subsequently at the tribunal, and the desperate chorus of cynical voices which tried to undermine its work?

It is fundamental to our democracy that it is the people who will decide what the political consequences of this report should be. I will confine myself to the basic point that electing to public office people who have been corrupt or who have failed to deal effectively with and tolerated corruption in their midst merely condemns us to more of this behaviour.

It is a fact the world over that some individuals involved in political life become corrupt and it would be foolish for any party to pretend they are immune from that possibility, but what this report presents is the systemic failure on the part of some to deal rigorously - or truthfully - with the issue of corruption when it emerges. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that one party in particular, rather than face up to the consequences of what had been going on, simply adopted a policy of "don't ask, don't tell" when it came to corruption. In reality it was not so much a case of ignoring the elephant in the living room as patting it on the head amid steadfast expressions of support. This happened not in the distant past, but under the previous Government.

One of my primary responsibilities as Minister for Justice and Equality is to ensure that the criminal justice system is equipped to deal adequately with corruption, whatever its source.

The House will be aware that the Government has already referred this report to the Garda Commissioner. The Commissioner in turn referred the report to the assistant commissioner in charge of the national support services, which include the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation. Specifically, the head of the Criminal Assets Bureau has been asked to lead the examination of the report. I have no doubt that An Garda Síochána will pursue the matters dealt with in the report wherever they lead and without fear or favour. It is true that, to date, the Criminal Assets Bureau has already been successfully engaged in the recovery of funds and assets from some of the individuals referred to in the report.

While it is the case that evidence given before the tribunal cannot be used itself as a basis for a criminal prosecution, it can form a roadmap for the Garda to examine the issues involved. Equally, the fact that the tribunal does not make a finding of what would amount to criminal behaviour against someone does not offer them any immunity if the Garda in its inquiries uncovers evidence of offences of any kind. I hope people co-operate fully with any inquiries which the Garda may undertake, and I expect that in particular those who feel wronged by the report would be happy to co-operate with the Garda in those circumstances.

It would be very foolish for anyone to assume that referring the report to An Garda Síochána is some sort of token exercise. Anyone deluded enough to think that should look at what has happened since earlier reports of the tribunal have been published: people have been convicted and imprisoned, some are awaiting trial and millions of euro have been recovered. Let me say it as plainly as I can: no one who has been involved in corrupt practices should think that the publication of the tribunal's report is an end to the matter.

The tribunal's report contains a number of useful recommendations aimed at strengthening the criminal law. I am able to reassure the House that because since my appointment I have been giving priority to the area of dealing with white collar crime generally, we will be able to address these recommendations quickly and effectively. Criminal law in the area of white collar crime was considerably strengthened by the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 2011 which I introduced earlier in this Government's lifetime. That measure is targeted at specified serious offences, including fraud, corruption and money laundering. As well as providing for whistleblowers' protection, the Act provides for a new offence relating to failure to report information to the Garda which could prevent the commission of white collar crime or which could assist the Garda in carrying out investigations into this area. These powers have already strengthened substantially the powers available to an Garda Síochána to pursue corruption. Last year, I also took steps to ensure that Ireland ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which was signed by the State in 2003. The convention provides a set of standards and rules to encourage countries to strengthen their regimes to fight corruption, and to promote proper management in public affairs and public property.

The tribunal recommends amending the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 to cover Oireachtas Members. I propose to repeal all seven Acts making up the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 2010 and replace them with a single Act which will apply to all persons in the public and private sector, including, of course, Members of both Houses. The tribunal also suggests the exclusion of bribe-givers from public tenders. We should also seriously consider the exclusion from public office of those who accept bribes.

I will also deal in the proposed corruption legislation with other recommendations made by the tribunal in this area. The tribunal has made recommendations in the area of safeguards against money laundering. Work is well under way in the Department on amending the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act) 2010 and we are looking at how the relevant recommendations of the tribunal can be best reflected in the legislation which is being prepared.

A number of the recommendations relate to asset confiscation and forfeiture. I previously informed the House that the operation of the proceeds of crime legislation is being reviewed by officials in the Department in consultation with the Criminal Assets Bureau and the Office of the Attorney General. The relevant provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 1994 are also being reviewed in the light of a European Commission proposal to reform the law on confiscation and asset recovery.

The report also contains recommendations about changes in the legislation governing the operation of tribunals. It is no criticism of the valuable work which had been done by Judge Mahon and his colleagues to repeat the general concern that tribunals of inquiry can take too long and cost too much to establish the truth. We had proposals for a greater role for the Oireachtas in carrying out inquiries which, in the event, did not find favour with the people in a referendum last autumn. We all need to reflect again on this whole area.

Specifically on tribunals legislation, I point to the fact that the previous Government published a Tribunals of Inquiry Bill in 2005 but for whatever reason left it languishing on the Dáil Order Paper. I have arranged for its restoration to the Dáil Order Paper and the Bill will be dealt with on Report Stage. We will address the specific recommendations made by the tribunal in that context.

I want to return briefly to the issue of corruption. The report states:

While traditionally corruption has been viewed as an issue of individual morality, in recent years, advances in understanding both its causes and its consequences mean that it is now also viewed as a problem of systemic failure. In other words, where an individual behaves corruptly, then the problem lies as much with the system which permitted or failed to prevent that behaviour as with that individual.

In recent years the concept of "systemic failure" has become the excuse for a variety of difficulties that have arisen and all too frequently it has been used to evade the concepts of accountability and personal responsibility. While clearly many reforms have been recommended that would create an architecture designed to remove the incentives and opportunity for corruption and to provide for greater transparency, I do not accept there is an equivalence between systemic imperfections and individual corruption. Central to the issue of individual corruption are issues of individual morality, ethical standards and responsibility. While the report disclosed corruption and poor judgment by some, it should not be forgotten that many others who held public office within the then imperfect system were not corrupt, did not make poor judgments and were not financially seduced. A concept of equivalence should not be used to explain or understand corrupt practices by those who should have behaved differently.

It would be a great tragedy if the corrupt behaviour of some public representatives acts to tarnish the good name of many who set out to serve the people honestly and to the best of their ability. It is against this background that it is so important that we have in place laws which defend us all - the public and public representatives alike - from corrupt practices. I hope I have been able to make clear today that I am determined as Minister for Justice and Equality to do everything I can to make sure this is so.

See this speech in context