Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 83: To ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the correspondence he has had with the Mahon tribunal; if he will publish the correspondence; if the Mahon tribunal has identified for him the list of matters it is investigating and on which it is intended to hold public hearings; the tribunal's estimate of the expected duration of its public hearings; the estimated cost of this tribunal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7501/07]

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On 15 December 2006, the chairman of the planning tribunal on his own initiative wrote to me to advise that the tribunal's public hearings would not be completed by 31 March 2007, the target date for the termination of the tribunal's work identified in 2004. The chairman stated that he anticipated that the tribunal would be involved in public hearings until the end of 2007 and possibly into the early months of 2008. Since this communication I have been in correspondence with the chairman regarding the duration and cost of the tribunal's work and have accepted an invitation to meet him to discuss these issues. I do not consider it appropriate at this time to publish this ongoing correspondence.

I am advised by the tribunal that it is engaged in five modules of investigation. The cost of the planning tribunal amounted to more than €62 million to the end of 2006. Expenditure in 2006 was nearly €16.2 million, of which €6.62 million related to the legal costs of third parties represented before the tribunal in the period 1997-2002. It is estimated that outstanding third party bills relating to this period might amount to some €5 million. The operational cost of the tribunal is approximately €10 million annually.

My Department does not have access to the detailed records of the tribunal which would be a necessary starting point for any accurate estimation of the overall cost of the tribunal. On the matter of costs it is interesting to note the contribution of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the Committee of Public Accounts last week where he spoke of the difficulties in estimating accurately the contingent liabilities of commissions and tribunals, commenting that he "may decide that it is not possible to do this".

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Total costs, including third party costs up to the end of 2002, appear to be less than €100 million according to the information provided by the chairman of the tribunal. That is much less than €1 billion. Did the tribunal indicate to the Minister the likely costs for the period from 2002 to date?

Is it not inappropriate for the Minister to meet the chairman of the tribunal to discuss matters relating to costs and the additional modules to be investigated because the House, not the Government, established the tribunal? The tribunal was required to decide by May 2005 what modules were to go to public investigation. Do I understand the Minister to have said that five additional modules will go to public investigation and if so has the tribunal informed him what those matters are?

Will he publish the correspondence between himself and the Mahon tribunal? The Mahon tribunal was established by the House not the Minister. The correspondence between the tribunal and the Minister is the property of the House. The Minister is the agent of the House and, with the greatest of respect the correspondence, on all these matters should be made available to the House and put into the Oireachtas Library. This is the business of the House not that of the Minister.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

All correspondence is covered by a confidentiality requirement. My natural disposition is to be open on the issue of correspondence. The correspondence is not completed and to break confidentiality I would show discourtesy to the tribunal. It is also more important that I complete this issue and then I will visit the issue of making all material available.

I do not disagree with the Deputy's thesis that the Minister is here to do the will of the House but the Minister also has a responsibility — as the Deputy has rightly pointed out — to keep in mind the issue of costs and finality in the tribunals. My correspondence with Mr. Justice Mahon has been respectful and cordial although I have read commentary to the effect that it is otherwise.

Mr. Justice Mahon has invited me to meet him and it would be the height of discourtesy to refuse that. We must decide how to determine what issues can be discussed. The House can be confident that I will be as forthcoming and as open with House as possible. It would, however, be misleading and discourteous to release incomplete correspondence. The Deputy correctly pointed out that this House determined the new arrangements that would apply after 2004. I will discuss the remaining issues with Judge Mahon. At the end of that process the Deputy might wish to probe further about the issue through a parliamentary question.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With regard to the legal fees being paid to the legal teams at the tribunal and working for the tribunal, my understanding is that they were to terminate on 31 March. It was expected the public hearings would conclude on that date. There were reports in the newspapers this morning that the Minister was to bring a memorandum on this matter to Government today and that the Government was going to consider it. Has a decision been made on the legal fees to be paid to the tribunal lawyers, and what is that decision?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is correct that a decision was made that, from 31 March 2007, different, lower per diem rates would be paid. The point can fairly be made from the point of view of the tribunal, and this is part of the ongoing dialogue, that while the tribunal would have anticipated a timetable for 2007, there has been a series of legal actions which have impeded or prevented the completion of that work. No decision was made today to change the decision made previously. In fact, I will refer back to the Government after I have had my discussions with Judge Mahon.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

So the higher legal fees will apply.

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, I am not saying that.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What will they be paid in April?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy would let me finish——

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What will a tribunal barrister be paid in April?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The decision on a lower tariff of fees was that they would come into operation from 31 March this year. There is to be a dialogue between me and the tribunal on the timetable issue. The tribunal can fairly put forward a case that legal actions have impeded its work. The tribunal has a case to make and we must listen to it. I ask the Deputy not to press me to anticipate what will happen following my discussion with the tribunal.

The Deputy correctly points out that the tribunal was set up by this House. The tribunal was given a task and we should support it in completing that task as efficiently, effectively and economically as possible.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister expect to end up in the Labour Court on the matter?

Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not sure that tribunal fees are a Labour Court matter.