Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

Last October I stood in this very spot and raised issues about Siteserv and the water metering contract. As the months progressed the questions extended into the wider issues surrounding IBRC and how it handled certain transactions. Ultimately, the questions moved to the dysfunctional relationship between IBRC and the Department of Finance.

IBRC had one remit, namely, to ensure that citizens got the maximum return possible for the €35 billion they were forced to pump into banks, primarily the failed Anglo Irish Bank. We want assurances, for example, as to whether the €119 million written off when Siteserv was sold to Denis O'Brien was in fact the best decision for Irish citizens. Some five months on from the establishment of the commission, we are at a stalemate.

Ironically, the special liquid liquidator, Kieran Wallace, the person whom the Department originally wanted to conduct a review into the Siteserv issue, is now claiming privilege and refusing to co-operate fully. Over the past 24 hours the public interest director of IBRC has taken to the airwaves to express concern about the injustice that will be perpetrated on the board of IBRC and its reputation if the commission collapses. What about the injustice perpetrated against Irish citizens, in a situation where the public bailed out the bank but cannot know how the assets were disposed of? That is the real injustice.

It appears that the balance of law falls on protecting individuals rather than the common good. How can that be right or even constitutional? Was that even considered when the inquiry was established? The Minister, Deputy Noonan, can claim that his Department has provided unredacted documents, but he is providing them inside a circle of confidentiality. If he is providing documents, but placing significant restrictions on them, how can he claim that he is co-operating fully?

Can the Taoiseach confirm whether any debtor involved in any of the transactions has threatened legal action if the commission proceeds? Can he confirm if the Minister, Deputy Noonan, is co-operating fully in a way that will allow the findings to be available for full public consumption? When did the Taoiseach first know of the problems with the commission? Apparently letters have been flying around for the past few months between the parties concerned. Articles in newspapers have been written by Cliff Taylor and John Walsh. Alan Dukes has known about it since August.

Does the Taoiseach's Department read these newspapers? Would that have been discussed? Would the Taoiseach have been kept in the loop on this issue? Will he tell us what he means by "as soon as possible"? The 2004 Act allowed for the setting up of these inquiries to replace very time-consuming and expensive tribunals. Does the Taoiseach agree that if he wanted to shut down debate on a particular topic the best way to do so would be to set up a commission of inquiry, because there can be no parliamentary questions, no freedom of information requests, no questions to the Taoiseach and no press inquiries? Unfortunately, in this case it appears that we do not even have an inquiry.

See this speech in context