Neale Richmond (Dublin Rathdown, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the Second Stage debate on this legislation, which I fundamentally believe is important although it will not necessarily get a high level of mainstream coverage. It is important, as we work to transpose the protection of the union's financial interests, PIF, directive into domestic legislation, that we look at the opportunities presented and, more importantly, the responsibilities of the State and agencies of the State in enforcing this directive. It is in our interests. This directive allows for an important level of harmonisation in dealing with fraud and theft against institutions of the EU across the member states.

I will touch on the situation in respect of the EPPO later on but the first thing to note when we talk about the area of the EU's financial interests and the reason why this directive and, in turn, the legislation is so important is that responsibility is ever-changing. When this directive was published in 2017, many of the challenges facing the Union and the State at present were probably not imagined or were far off in the ether. The first of these relates to the Covid-19 response of the European Union. It is a collective response, be it in terms of storing PPE, buying vaccines or investing in research and development. They are EU financial interests and it is the work of the European Union and the collaborative work of the member states through the European Union that needs to come under this directive to ensure that the protections of the Union and the citizenry are maintained through this directive.

The second area which I think is important and which has a particular resonance pertains to section 3 of this legislation and the references to VAT. Of particular interest to this State in recent weeks and pertaining to this legislation is the impact on VAT and the impact on the implementation of the Ireland-Northern Ireland protocol of the withdrawal agreement post Brexit. All of us have no doubt been contacted by many constituents in recent days on buying or shipping online for personal purposes, as well as business purposes. There are anomalies and confusion that many people who are buying in from the UK are facing when it comes to VAT and other customs charges and related delivery charges. It is an area where this directive has a real and powerful role to play because it relates to the EU's financial interests when it comes to dealing with the UK and running projects on the whole of this island, not just in this jurisdiction.

One of the key points to make when discussing this legislation and the impact of the activities covered by this legislation is the fact that any time someone attempts to defraud the EU, he or she is not trying to defraud an alternative body or an alien subject, he or she is trying to defraud the citizenry. The EU is our Union, just as anyone who seeks to defraud the State seeks to defraud the individuals and citizens resident within the State. Fraud or theft against the European Union is not a victimless crime. The lack of resources and the fact it may take away from individuals can be felt by everyone in our society and that is why, as Deputy Howlin mentioned, not only is it important that we transpose this directive properly and have rigorous legislation in place, but that we also have rigorous enforcement tools in place that will ensure that we equip the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, and An Garda Síochána with the resources to fully implement this directive.

Regarding the EPPO, I recognise the Minister of State's contribution earlier. We said there are major issues for Ireland from a common law perspective in terms of why we had to understandably opt out of elements of it, as other member states did. That is true and there is no point debating that as a matter of law. However, we should not rule out, in the future, the possibility of playing a part within that or seeing how we could further integrate our legislation, even though it is within a common law jurisdiction, to further allow for the proper harmonisation of European norms to ensure these directives are fully enforceable and as enforceable in one member state as in another, be it Ireland, Denmark, Hungary or whichever ones have opted out.

I refer to the area of pet crime on which the Minister of State laid out his concerns eloquently earlier in the day. I fully recognise his track record in other legislation and the work he has done over the last number of years as a Member of the House. It is something all of us have been touched by, whether in dealing with constituents or as pet owners. It is so serious a matter that it is important to recognise this through the Department of Justice and the legal system, as well as the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. One hears harrowing reports of not just individuals who have lost a treasured family pet but the worrying environments and situations into which these stolen pieces of property, as some people view them, are put. These are disgraceful, abominable conditions and it is important to ensure that every aspect of our legislation addresses those areas that are fundamentally concerning and worrying for our society.

I am grateful to have the opportunity to contribute to this very straightforward debate. I imagine this legislation will pass through the House with some ease. When it comes to transposing all European directives, I welcome the opportunity the Minister has given to the Seanad on Committee Stage and to Members of the Dáil on this Stage. Every time European legislation or a directive comes before the House, it requires rigorous scrutiny, not just on the floor of the House but also to make sure we elaborate its impact on wider society. This is a good piece of work from the European Union and from the Government and the Minister. I am happy to support it.

See this speech in context