Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

All citizens of the State stand before the courts innocent until proved guilty and we depend on the courts to uphold this vital constitutional principle. However, we also depend on our investigating and prosecuting authorities to ensure that proper, thorough, accurate and convincing investigations of allegations of crime take place, particularly crimes that have rocked the nation. The manifest incompetence of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement in the case brought against Mr. Seán FitzPatrick has not only caused a public outcry but it beggars belief. As to the notion that it is a matter of resources, coaching of witnesses and tampering with evidence are not matters of resources. The same issues arise when we talk about the Garda Síochána. There are fundamental ways in which proper conduct of business takes place.

This case brings to light that we need to tackle these matters. Some suggestions have been put forward. We need to ensure these fundamental questions result in fundamental answers being brought and discussed by the House. We will participate in this discussion. However, we must also acknowledge that much of the root cause of public anger relates to the cost to the people of bailing out the banks. The desire of the public to see convictions of those who gambled with the economic security of our State is absolutely understandable. Criminal convictions are not, however, the only way to tackle public anger over the bailout of the banks. As the banks return to stability and profitability, we should begin to use the funding they generate to repair the social damage done in the State. The investment made to bail out the banks came from the National Pensions Reserve Fund and people are entitled to see a result from that investment.

Last week, the House voted in favour of a Labour Party proposal to delay the sale of the State's shares in Allied Irish Banks until such time as we can invest the proceeds in vitally needed infrastructure. Disturbingly, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, has made known his intention to disregard this vote. If the Government disagrees with the vote of the House, it can try to rescind it, but that is not, I understand, the course to be taken. The Minister referred to a commitment in the programme for Government which has no more standing than a resolution of the House. Even if that were not the case, the programme for Government simply commits the State to use the banking shareholdings in the best interests of the people. Few would argue with the proposition that it is infinitely more in the interests of the Irish people to invest these moneys in vitally needed schools, hospitals and roads than in taking 1% off our national debt.

Before the Taoiseach vacates his office in the coming weeks, will he ensure the vote of the Dáil is respected and the policy adopted by the House last week is vindicated by his Government? Any other action would undermine the legitimacy of and public confidence in this people's assembly. Will he accept that proceeding with an initial public offering, IPO, in the face of the opposition of Dáil Éireann is an action that undermines the legitimacy of the House? Will he reconsider this bad proposal and work with my party and all other parties in the House to ensure the proceeds of this investment can benefit the people and that they get something back from the bailout of the banks?

See this speech in context