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

I am sharing time with Deputy Ryan. In the Minister's opening statement, she spoke about people being frustrated and disappointed.

She is wide of the mark in using tame terms such as frustration and disappointment because people are outraged and furious and have a right to be.

The case in the courts this week must be a game changer. Otherwise, we may as well hang up our hats because nothing will change. Serious action must be taken as a consequence of what occurred. There is widespread acceptance and significant evidence that white-collar crime goes virtually unpunished in Ireland. This is why people are saying, "Here we go again."

The 2011 general election was supposed to be the election to change everything. People wanted reform and the introduction of systems and checks and balances that would prevent a recurrence of the types of behaviour that caused the crash. However, the fragmentation of our institutions and organisations continues and it is clear they cannot cope with the issues they face.

The website of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, features the following statement: "The mission of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is to improve the compliance environment for corporate activity in the Irish economy by encouraging adherence to the requirements of the Companies Acts, and bringing to account those who disregard the law." The office clearly failed in its mission in the recent court case.

I had dealings with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement when I was dealing with the issue of Siteserv, when there was definite evidence of a spike in the price of shares in a company that was heavily indebted. My contact with the office involved letters being sent back and forth on this matter. I was informed by the ODCE that it had no role in the matter and did not hold this type of information. If insider trading is not related to corporate responsibility, I do not understand the meaning of corporate responsibility.

In 2015, the Social Democrats sought to bring a solution to the table when we called for the establishment of an independent anti-corruption agency. We studied examples of similar agencies operating in other countries and made a proposal in the Dáil in December 2015. After our proposal was voted down by Fine Gael and the Labour Party, we persisted with calls for an anti-corruption agency and undertook extensive work on how such an agency would operate. Examples of such practice internationally informed our research. Two years after we first introduced this idea, the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, has decided to adopt certain aspects of it. However, he advocates that the agency should only operate in respect of the public service. If the recent case demonstrates anything, it is that such an agency should not only apply to the public service.

A functioning anti-corruption agency would prevent, investigate and prosecute corruption. Given that we have far too much fragmentation, the new agency would consolidate agencies charged with tackling corruption and strengthen the legislative framework in which they operate. It would help to rebuild trust and renew public and international confidence in Ireland as a place in which to do business - not dodgy business but clean and honest business.

When I was dealing with the Siteserv issue and the IBRC debacle, I was contacted by a remarkable number of people from the business world. What they wanted was to be able to operate in a country that was a fair and honest place in which to do business. They did not believe Ireland was such a place. To give an example, the report on the Garda training college in Templemore states that Garda staff assigned to administrative roles in the college had no training or experience in administration and no knowledge of public procurement or financial procedures. When this can occur in the college that trains gardaí, is it any wonder we do not take white-collar crime seriously at any level? What is required at political level is fundamental change, rather than postponing action until some time in the future.

See this speech in context