Dáil debates

Thursday, 23 May 2013

Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Bill 2013: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

12:20 pm

Photo of Michael Healy-RaeMichael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Technical Group for allowing me some of its speaking time to contribute on the Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Bill 2013. This is an important Bill in the context of what has happened over the years down at the Four Courts with the massive toll and burden put on our already struggling taxpayers when they had to pay massive sums of money for tribunals and investigations that at the end of the day yielded very little in return. There have to be better ways of dealing with our business. Of course, there must be oversight, as well as investigations into wrongdoing, but we have to use the structures already in place to our better advantage.

I sit on the Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions. I would like to take the opportunity to compliment all of the people who work on that committee, our excellent Chairman and our former and original Chairman who I was sorry to see have to step down over an internal party issue. He was a great Chairman and very workmanlike, as is our new Chairman. This committee is fulfilling a proper role. Using politicians for a purpose such as the committee’s is sensible because the politicians are there, they are being paid anyway and it is important we use systems and structures anyway and every way.

Mr. Justice Murray had an important viewpoint on this. He stated that he did not see any reason the Oireachtas could not conduct inquiries of the nature that it has for practical purposes traditionally done, including inquiries into matters concerning competency and efficiency in departmental or public administration as well as such matters as those concerning the proper or effective implementation of policy and to make findings accordingly. He further stated that if a particular officeholder such as the chief executive officer of a semi-State body is by virtue of his appointment, whether by statute or contract, answerable to the Houses of the Oireachtas, different considerations arise. He did not consider that the order proposed to be made by his court affected such a situation. The difficulty for current Oireachtas committees is knowing how far this limitation goes. Recommendations were made following the Abbeylara case, which was important.

The Bill is structured in Parts. I am also worried about bias. The Minister stated section 18 prevents a Member from sitting on a committee where a perception of bias might arise. Bias and conflicts of interest happen on a regular basis. For instance, last week I raised the issue of the protection of rural post offices in the House. One of the first things I thought I should say was that I am a postmaster of a small post office. If I was prohibited from speaking in the House about issues in which I might have a conflict of interest because of my other work or activities, that would be a major problem. County councillors face a similar issue. A Member who is a farmer could be accused if he was debating restructuring the single farm payment scheme of trying to look after himself, which would be grossly untrue. Perceptions of bias might arise 100 or 200 times a day because of the involvement of Members in other work and activities. I foresee great difficulties with the implementation of that section.

Deputy Mattie McGrath highlighted a problem with the recent hearings of the Joint Committee on Health and Children, to which I also took exception. I appreciate the work of the Chairman and I acknowledge the contribution of all those who attended to give evidence, but the Government parties were making it look as though the hearings were inclusive by inviting all these people but, at the same time, the hearings were rushed. Like Deputy Mattie McGrath, I have concerns about the people who were omitted or who were not invited to appear. There seemed to be a rush with the committee sitting between 9.30 a.m. and 8 p.m. or 9 p.m., with which I have no problem, but the committee should have allowed more evidence to be given by people representing other sections of society who wanted to air their concerns. Unfortunately, they were not allowed to do so.

I refer to reports. When the tribunals of inquiry published their reports, one would have wanted a lorry to take all the paperwork. What was gained by them, other than a number of people making a great deal of money at the taxpayer's expense? There was not so much as a sop at the end of it. Allegations were made but there was nothing at the end of it. I would welcome any Government proposal that would ensure such a scenario could not be repeated.

The people want to know how the banking crisis was allowed to happen, why future generations will be saddled with debt they did not incur and why young couples will be left struggling all the days of their lives. It is a great regret of mine that some young people will never have disposable income because every penny they take in will have to be accounted for and budgeted because of the enormous debts they have. They want to know how this was allowed to happen, how the banks were able to do what they did, how hundreds of billions of euro were given to property developers and how a small number of people ran the country into the ground. I do not take the blame from politicians. Where was the oversight and regulation? When I was starting out, if a person went to the bank manager looking for a few thousand pounds, he went with his cap in his hand and he was fortunate if he was given a small loan. We ended up in a position where bank managers were telling people who wanted €250,000 that they were better off to take €300,000 and go on a holiday or a buy a new car or make a few other purchases and roll it all into the mortgage. There was no regulation, oversight, control or thoughtfulness. Somebody has to explain to the public what happened and why it happened and people have to be held accountable for their actions. It was a massive race to the bottom. I would like an inquiry into that and I would like people to be held accountable. I do not want an inquiry that will compound the insult to people by incurring significant costs. Nobody wants that, including the Government parties, and it should not be the case.

I compliment former Senator, Martin McAleese, who showed what could be done on a modest budget. He published an excellent report, which was condensed, factual and well received by everybody, including those on whose behalf he was conducting it. They had, unfortunately, been subject to harsh conditions over many years. He did that work with a small group of people for a modest cost - approximately €12,000. That is the workmanlike, no nonsense way to do business. It shows that inquiries can be conducted for a modest cost.

I refer to the inquiries referendum in autumn 2011. The electorate endorsed the status quo, where the scope of any Oireachtas inquiry to make findings that would damage the reputation of any individual is strictly limited. The Government parties were side swiped by the electorate and they got a land because they did not see it coming. I saw it coming because I dealt with people every day who were saying they were against what the Government proposed. The best way to describe this was they did not trust the Government parties in what they wanted the electorate to allow them to do. We have to be careful and mindful that the people must have confidence in the systems that are put in place. This is related to ensuring due process for individual, which is vital, and having proper checks and balances in place.

A high profile case was referred to the Standards in Public Office Commission in the past few days. I look forward to due process in that case and to the commission's response. It could have major implications for the Government.

It is something many of us are eagerly awaiting. I am sure it will deal with that issue in a workman-like way and that it will not dilly-dally about it.

We talk about people having the right to their good names. I noted a Deputy had concerns about what had gone on in his case. I do not want to paint everybody with the same brush, because we have very respectable journalists, even in Dublin, who do good work, report things in an honest and factual way and who are intelligent, but we also have journalists who write for national and other newspapers for whom it is like a race to the bottom. They push the borders out all the time, whether in regard to a Minister, a Deputy or somebody else. Much of the time their targets are politicians. We have to take criticism if we deserve it but how do they honestly stand over calling people names and using bad language? It is a race to the bottom. It is like a test every day to see how far they will go and there is a clique of them at it. Somebody has to shout "Stop" because one cannot allow that type of behaviour. People are entitled to their good names.

We are extremely grateful to the electorate for giving us the opportunity to serve it. One of my proudest days was the day I was first elected to Kerry County Council, and I only barely got elected. The people entrusted me to work for them and, thankfully, they have kept me at it since then. I carry on my work in an ordinary way and, like every other politician, I do my very best every day but that does not mean certain sectors of the media can ridicule me and try to paint me out to be something I am not. If they print lies all of the time and if enough people read them, then that perception becomes a reality and they have won.

I do not know if the Minister of State, Deputy John Perry, has been affected by the type of activity about which I am talking but many Members of this House have been. I, for one, will not accept it anymore. I set down a marker in recent months and tackled some of these situations. I am glad to report that local charities are quite happy with my engagement with these newspapers because they were the winners at the end of the day. I was very glad that the rubbish which was written benefited people in my community financially. I challenge the journalists who wrote about me in the past to write about me again and I will get more money for charities, which is proper order. If lies are written about other Members of this House and if they are ridiculed and made out to be something they are not, I strongly suggest they take on the newspapers because everyone is entitled to his or her good name and to get up in the morning and to do his or her work. If that work is representing people, it does not mean that one can be pilloried by somebody with a poison pen. Such people are out there and they think it is colourful and intelligent to use bad language and to make derogatory statements about people. What right does a person writing for a newspaper have to do such a thing?

Journalists may take a differing view but that is the world of politics and, thankfully, we live in a democracy. Fair comment and fair criticism are always welcome. I would be critical of many of the things the Minister of State's Government has done but I would not become personal towards the politicians proposing and supporting what is being introduced. I would disagree with the proposal but I would not go after the person promoting it.

Editors have to be fair. When they see what can happen, they will wake up to the fact that there is no room for gutter journalists and that there is nothing smart about somebody writing with a poison pen and trying to ridicule people because of where they come from. These people think they have a monopoly on being right. From what I have seen of many of them, they do not have a monopoly on intelligence. To think that their parents sent them to school and to university to write some of the rubbish they write.

Having said that, we have excellent journalists, many of whom attend this House on a daily basis. I will not embarrass them by praising them individually but they know who they are. We have great journalists in this House and around the country who are fair and write properly but we have the gutter journalists for whom there is no room in the Ireland of the future because using bad language and calling people names is the worst type of bullying but they have, unfortunately, been allowed to get away with it. I will not stand for it in the future and I strongly urge other politicians not to do so either and to show we will not be torn apart in a savage way by people who think they are so much better than everyone else. The arrogance of some of them is frightening.

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for allowing to speak about this as it is something I had to get off my chest. I will defend myself robustly in the future against the gutter journalists of this country. I will always accept fair criticism and deal with those people in a respectful way. It would be great if others would do the same. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for his indulgence and I thank the Minister of State. I have made my feelings on this issue well known.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.