Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am aware of the difficulties, but the impression among the public is that it will be possible to inquire into that night. In addition, the legislation provides that the committee will not even be entitled to ask for papers relating to discussions of a meeting of the Government or of a committee appointed by the Government or relating to discussions at a meeting of a committee appointed by the Government whose membership consists of more than one member of the Government. The committee cannot seek information if the evidence or document could, if given, be expected to prejudice criminal proceedings. People can understand that.

The committee cannot seek evidence if the evidence or document could, and this is very important regarding that night, "reasonably be expected to adversely affect the security of the State or to be prejudicial to the State in its relations with other states". We are in the eurozone. Everything that was done that night affected our relations with other EU or eurozone countries. The Germans had an interest in it. The English Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer were on the telephone at nine o'clock the following morning. Everything that happened that night had an impact on our relations with member states of the eurozone. However, the Bill provides that the committee cannot ask for information if that information could be "prejudicial to the State in its relations with other states". What happened that night was prejudicial. People talked about how Ulster Bank, banks in the State, banks in Northern Ireland and banks in the UK did not have the guarantee which the covered institutions here had. Everything that was done that night was prejudicial to some countries in the EU, but the Bill provides that the committee cannot even seek that information to discuss it.

I agree with the need for the inquiry but the committee will be unrealistically constrained in terms of what is permitted to be given to it. I am aware that Cabinet confidentiality is an issue. Also, the committee cannot seek information if it would interfere with the prevention, detection or investigation of an offence, nor can it seek information relating to information being kept for the purpose of assessing the liability of a person in respect of tax, duty or other payment payable to the State, local authority or HSE. In respect of the general scheme of taxation, it cannot seek papers if they relate to the collection of taxes. There are many exemptions in the section that are fundamental to many issues people wish to discuss.

Section 69 puts the tin hat on this. It states that if a person is asked to give information or evidence and they are of the opinion they should not do so because it is in breach of some of the matters referred to in the earlier section, they can provide a letter to that effect and "the committee shall, if necessary, adjourn the proceedings concerned in relation to the particular matter for such period as it considers appropriate in the circumstances". We have encountered that in the Committee of Public Accounts. It can be supported with a letter from a Minister and the committee of inquiry will be stopped in its tracks. We have seen that happen in the House previously. The Minister thinks there is good reason for that provision, but the public right to know should supersede it on those issues. That must be dealt with.

That relates to the Part 2 inquiries under sections 6 to 10, inclusive. The Minister has provided for similar powers in sections 83 and 84 with regard to ordinary committees of the House. There is the same exclusion regarding the right of access to information. The Minister has spancelled the committee before it starts. Under section 96, the committee can go to the High Court if somebody is not co-operating.

Finally, adverse findings can only be made against a current Member. Somebody who resigns can get out the door and the committee cannot say anything about him. It also cannot say anything about somebody who was a member of a previous Administration. The difficulty is that some of these inquiries could extend beyond the term of a Dáil, so all the work will be lost. If a Member is facing a problem, he can hightail it out the door and get off scot free. There is also the issue that was raised in respect of all tribunals of inquiry in the past. Evidence adjudicated in any of these inquiries cannot be used in any further proceedings, even disciplinary proceedings. If somebody is shown to have misbehaved at an inquiry, it cannot be used in disciplinary proceedings thereafter, let alone court proceedings.

I understand the complications, and perhaps the Minister cannot get around them. However, people should be aware that this new legislation that the Minister has trumpeted has plenty of bells and whistles, but no substance.

See this speech in context