Dáil debates

Wednesday, 1 February 2017

Establishment of a Commission of Inquiry into the National Asset Management Agency: Statements

 

10:15 am

Photo of Seán FlemingSeán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to contribute to this debate. I am Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts and, therefore, have a particular point of view. I am expressing that view in a personal capacity and not on behalf of the committee. I acknowledge there was agreement in principle last autumn to establish a commission of investigation. Since then, however, the Committee of Public Accounts has been carrying out a lot of work. As Chairman and in the interest of accountability to the Oireachtas, I believe we will have a detailed report available this month and that there should be a detailed debate in the Oireachtas on that report. After that, let us see what issues that could have been addressed by a commission will have been addressed by the Committee of Public Accounts and what issues are still not addressed. Many of the issues leading to the call for this commission are the result of a television programme in Northern Ireland on incidents in that jurisdiction that are beyond the remit of any commission. A commission would have no jurisdiction to investigate any events in the North.

The Comptroller and Auditor General has produced his report. NAMA gave a strong rebuttal, and I respect its right to do that. Subsequently, as the Minister has indicated, the Committee of Public Accounts has had 12 public meetings. We have had witnesses from NAMA, including not only the chairman and chief executive on various occasions, but also every single board member. This is possibly unprecedented. In addition, we have had witnesses from Northern Ireland and the United States. They could not be compelled by any commission of investigation and could choose to appear voluntarily, as they did before the Committee of Public Accounts. They would be entitled not to appear before a commission chaired by a High Court judge, for example, if they so chose. We have to be conscious of that.

The Oireachtas should not take the lazy option. If there is ability within the Oireachtas to examine NAMA, it should be exhausted completely because having the Committee of Public Accounts or any other committee carry out its work costs the taxpayer nothing. If after that work there is further work requiring a commission, let us by all means follow up on the agreement in principle.

I wish to add two other points. Every three years, the Department of Finance produces a detailed report under section 227 on NAMA's activities.

Independently of that, the Comptroller and Auditor General conducts a report under section 226. These two reports, as well as that of the Committee of Public Accounts, will be before the Dáil and should be examined in detail before we go any further. It would be remiss of the Dáil not to examine the evidence before it and to pay a commission to do so instead. The onus is on the Dáil to follow through on this. I am not saying that there should not be a commission, but we need to know how to proceed with it.

I wish to address some of the practical issues that will arise. NAMA has made a complaint to the Garda under the Criminal Justice Act 2011 concerning possible contraventions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. I do not know the current state of play on that. NAMA has also made a complaint regarding a former member of the Northern Ireland committee to the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, but I have not seen the outcome of that. NAMA made a further complaint to SIPO on 12 September in respect of possible breaches of the Ethics in Public Office Act. We have not seen the outcome of that.

The committee has received correspondence from the UK's National Crime Agency confirming that the latter is investigating the sale of NAMA's Northern Ireland loan portfolio. We have not seen the outcome of that police investigation. The committee has been informed that the US Securities and Exchange Commission is carrying out an investigation because the purchaser, Cerberus, is based in the US. We have also been informed that the US Department of Justice is carrying out an investigation, but we have not seen the outcome of that yet.

The report of the Committee of Public Accounts and any evidence that we possess will be available to those investigations and to any commission of investigation established by the Oireachtas but there is no point in establishing one if it will get bogged down by four or five other inquiries that have yet to be completed. I do not want to long-finger the issue.

I have confidence in the ability of the Oireachtas to examine NAMA in detail. We should not outsource our job because of laziness. If it is within the ability and remit of the House or its committees, we should do it. When we reach the end of the road, anything that remains unresolved should be handed over to a commission of investigation. We did not choose to use powers of compellability on our witnesses. By asking people to attend voluntarily, we received a good level of co-operation from most and were able to make speedy progress. Had we gone down the compellability route as we were entitled to do, we would only be reporting in two years' time. Some believe that NAMA should be stopped in its tracks, but it is substantially through its process, and I am concerned that we would still be running a commission of investigation after NAMA had completed its work and folded up its tent.

I am not saying that there does not need to be a commission, but let the Oireachtas perform its functions and exercise its role over accountability. In too many cases, the Oireachtas does not hold regulators to account and people ask what is happening. Regulators are accountable to the House, as is NAMA. Until we exhaust that process, we should hold off on deciding the terms of reference. When we reach that point I, as Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts, will ask how much the commission will cost and what its timescale and objective will be. Narrow, focused terms of reference will achieve more results than broader based ones, given that we would have to change the latter to reach a conclusion as soon as possible.

These are my personal views as Chairman. They are not the views of the committee or Fianna Fáil. I hope that the Oireachtas respects the report being produced by the Comptroller and Auditor General, which the committee will be completing and publishing this month. If it does not cover the issues, I will be the first to accept that and agree that a commission of inquiry is required, but let us give the committee the courtesy of reaching that point before we rush the terms of reference.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.