Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share my time with Deputy Quinn.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I compliment Deputy Hogan on tabling this Private Members' Bill. The purpose of the Bill is to give the Comptroller and Auditor General the power to audit the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and to compel the chief executive officer to attend before an Oireachtas committee to account for the authority's activities and to report on its financial accounts.

I fully support the objectives of the Bill. The DDDA was a good and exciting initiative. My colleague, Deputy Quinn, created the vision. It delivered very valuable regeneration projects down through the years. It was the jewel in the crown of State-sponsored development bodies until it unfortunately cosied up to the developer and financier, was enthralled by the get rich quick philosophy and was ultimately corrupted in its operations.

The annual report for 2008 makes sorry reading. A consolidated income and expenditure surplus of €3.7 million in 2007 had become an incredible deficit of €213 million in 2008. The reckless purchase of the Irish Glass Bottle Company site with a private developer at the height of the property boom was a disaster and more than €5 million in interest payments are now haemorrhaging out of the authority's accounts for a site that was never developed and whose purchase price of more than €400 million has now dwindled to a mere €60 million estimated value.

Professor Niamh Brennan, the new chairwoman of the authority, has admitted that the Dublin Docklands Development Authority will need an injection of at least €35 million from the State to bolster its repayments on the Irish Glass Bottle site. The section 25 planning permission granted on the North Lotts site was found by the High Court to be flawed, lacking in transparency and declared null and void. A further legal action has been initiated by Bernard McNamara against the DDDA in regard to the Irish Glass bottle site transaction.

A "systematic conflict of interest" occurred at the docklands authority in the middle years of this decade according to the chairwoman, Professor Niamh Brennan, in the annual report 2008. Crossover, high level membership of the board with directors of financial institutions poisoned the authority's operation. Thus irregularities in planning and in financing and blatant conflicts of interest have damaged the good name of the authority and crippled its operation in recent years. The docklands is now strewn with shelved, cancelled or half built projects.

The mission statement of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority was to provide economic and social regeneration for the docklands area and for the docklands communities. It stated: "We will develop Dublin Docklands into a world-class city quarter, a paragon of sustainable inner city regeneration, one in which the whole community enjoys the highest standards of access to education, employment, housing and social amenity and which delivers a major contribution to the social and economic prosperity of Dublin and the whole of Ireland."

While it facilitated the construction of more than 4,000 units of accommodation and granted planning permission for 811 units of social and affordable housing under the section 25 planning scheme, it failed to provide for the housing needs of the local dockland communities. Some 369 units or fewer than half the 811 units granted planning permission have been built and only 37 social housing units have come on stream on the northside of the Liffey, Clarion Quay, and they were built eight years ago.

There are still issues to be resolved around the joint ventures with developers for the construction of residential developments in Hanover Quay, Gallery Quay, Longboat Quay and Forbes Quay. These were developments on the old 24 acre gasometer site which had been acquired by the authority through the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government much earlier.

Approximately 200 units of social housing were provided to the authority as part of the public private partnership deals with no cost to the authority. At the same time, the authority drew down the real cost of the units from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government under the loans subsidy scheme. There is no mention good, bad or indifferent in the annual report as to what happened to this money which is well in excess of €50 million. The report only refers to the sale of 43 units of affordable houses on these sites.

The chief executive officer has promised to amend the accounts to reflect this substantial omission and I trust will also state what the moneys have been used for. For example, has the housing capital subsidy been used to run current budgets and other costs? Dublin City Council should step in, procure and allocate units which have been completed but on which the authority has been dragging its heels on the north side of the Liffey. For example, we have been waiting almost 18 months for 51 units in Castleforbes to be allocated.

Moreover, the local authority should for the time being be the sole authority for the granting of planning permission since the DDDA has demonstrated irregularities with developers and compromised the planning process, resulting in legal actions, loss of funds and credibility.

A headline in today's The Irish Times states "Gormley vows to act decisively over Dublin Docklands Authority" yet all the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has done is to ask the DDDA to compile two internal reports on the finance operations and the planning functions of the authority. He has rejected the provisions of this Bill.

The Comptroller and Auditor General needs to audit the authority and with the injection of State funds which are not being sought, he should be able to do so.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to put on record my view on what has happened. It is very easy at this point, because of the mistakes made in the property market, to criticise the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. The treatment of the former chief executive is something which must be revisited in due course. The membership of the board is ultimately decided by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. If there were cosy relationships and cross directorships, then it was for the Department, in the first instance, to take a view as to whether such appointments were appropriate. I am not aware that it intervened or expressed any such view at any point.

In regard to the Irish Glass Bottle site in south Dublin, the authority, with the support of the community council and others, acted in the best interest of that proposal. That it has now fallen in value is a reflection on the Irish property market as much as it is a reflection on the judgment of the officials, the executive and the board of the authority. I would say to my colleague, Deputy Costello, that the one consolation is the property will become the property of NAMA and will stay within the State sector.

This is the largest area for redevelopment in the city centre. When one looks at the way in which much of suburban Dublin has moved to the outskirts of Carlow, Kildare, Mullingar, etc., we should take a much more sanguine and long-term view on the possibility for rejuvenation and regeneration in the Poolbeg peninsula than the current travails of the property permit.

I will mention something that is not in the Bill proposed by the Fine Gael Party. I can see no difficulty with or objection to the Comptroller and Auditor General examining the accounts. The authority is a semi-State body that should be accountable to this Oireachtas in the course of its activities. I do not support the proposal that the Dublin Docklands Development Authority be integrated or merged with the dead hand of Dublin City Council.

The planning proposal for section 25 gave rise to the legal action referred to by Deputy Costello. The concept of a master plan going through a planning process which enabled people to see what was going to happen and provide some certainty for the planners and developers through section 25 was innovative. By and large, it has served the redevelopment of Dublin's docklands very well. To transfer the planning functions of the authority - or the entire authority - to Dublin City Council would be a disaster.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The next speaker is Deputy Seán Fleming and there are 30 minutes in his slot. I understand he wishes to share time with his colleagues.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Cuffe, Fitzpatrick, Gogarty, Chris Andrews and Cyprian Brady.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Phil Hogan, the Opposition spokesperson for the environment, heritage and local government, for bringing forward this Private Members' Bill. I chair the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and we have discussed the Dublin Docklands Development Authority on numerous occasions at meetings during the course of this year. I accept Deputy Quinn's comments in that it was originally set up in 1997 to secure social and economic regeneration of the docklands area.

Earlier this year members of the committee visited the area and were very impressed with the various activities we saw. Only last week the new chairperson of the authority, Professor Niamh Brennan, appeared before the committee to discuss its annual report. It was like being on a different planet from where we were earlier in the year dealing with the same organisation. That is down to the changes in the organisation in the intervening period.

I have a straightforward view. I listened to Professor Brennan at the meeting and as Chairman I put the straight question to her of why our committee should not recommend that the organisation be dissolved in view of the massive financial losses and because it will take a couple of years before it can break even. It will probably take forever and a day to repay its deficit. I was impressed at Professor Brennan's ability, competence and confidence in arguing that her team was the best organisation to bring the authority forward. As Chairman of the committee, I am willing to go along with that and give her some time.

She stated that losses have arisen and somebody will have to pick up the tab. If Dublin City Council or some other organisation gets it, somebody else would be picking up the pieces. Professor Brennan felt the authority was the best organisation to deal with the matter.

One difficulty is that it is a combined planning and development authority. Professor Brennan has indicated that separate reports are being carried out and structures are to be implemented to separate the two functions. There is an inevitable problem when people in an organisation want to promote planning and development, with others dealing with social and economic regeneration. It must be difficult to separate the two concepts.

Professor Brennan noted that there was a systemic conflict of interest between directors on the board of the authority and Anglo Irish Bank. That has now been excised and is no longer the case. We are picking up the pieces from these difficulties and transactions entered into. Other members of the authority, including Dublin City Council members, must have been horrified about what was happening in their name. As they are local people they were probably getting flak for some of the decisions made above their heads. It was disappointing to yesterday hear the Sinn Féin representative from Dublin city argue that the authority is very unrepresentative of the area. It was an enormous slight on the community representatives on the council, although major mistakes were made.

The Comptroller and Auditor General should not audit the authority. The auditing practices of the Comptroller and Auditor General are probably no better or worse than most of the major accounting firms in the world. It is normal procedure that non-commercial State bodies have the Comptroller and Auditor General as auditor but this is not so for commercial State organisations. The principal reason is that the Comptroller and Auditor General normally audits organisations where practically all the funding is provided by the Exchequer; the Dublin Docklands Development Authority may get little or no funding but much of what it gets is generated from development levies raised by the authority itself at local level. That commercial activity would mean it would not normally come under the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General is overstretched but there must be more accountability to this House from the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. I would like to see a change in legislation on that front but there are more substantive issues to be dealt with in the authority than changing the auditor.

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is not my area of expertise but I had a strong view on the whether the Irish Glass Bottle Company should have been closed and the site sold in the first place. It was a regressive step. We have no glass recycling facility within the 26 counties and given that oil prices will increase over the next number of years, such an indigenous industry would have served us well. I do not know whether a facility will be resurrected on another site but we would not have experienced this scandalous waste of resources and overspending if the bottle company had been funded properly and appropriate measures put in place to ensure recycling took pride of place in the State. For example, the Green Party has called for years for refundable deposits on bottle and cans but this has been thwarted by the Repak establishment. If glass bottles were refundable, we would have an industry providing jobs during the economic downturn.

We know where we are regarding the site. I am cynical and biased about the activities of the developers and decisions makers involved over the past number of years. I do not know whether we believe Mr. Maloney or Mr. McNamara regarding who said what. When everything emerges, it will not look good and I suspect dodgy dealings have taken place, highlighting at the very least cronyism and back slapping in the old boy's club.

This is not the time to introduce this legislation, worthy as it is. The Minister stated recently that he appointed Professor Brennan, who is an expert in corporate governance matters. She has been charged with producing reports on corporate governance within the authority and we should wait and see. It is the role of the Ministers for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Finance to ensure that the authority acts in a prudent and proper way. However, the proposal to bring the authority within the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General has wider implications for other State bodies and since the DDDA does not receive at least 50% of its annual funding from the Exchequer, it cannot come under the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Minister stated it is to necessary or relevant to bring in the Comptroller and Auditor General.

I am confident that the authority's financial affairs will be managed in a more prudent manner with the oversight of Professor Brennan. That does not mean we will cast everything that took place into the dark recesses. Professor Brennan is competent and capable and she will not be influenced by the back slapping and cronyism of the past. I am confident that information will come to light and that the Minister will act in a decisive, appropriate and timely fashion. It is not time now, however, to seek that information through this legislation. It is up to the chairman to make a report. I have full confidence in her and that the Minister acted prudently and decisively regarding her appointment. It is too soon to tell but I hope a report is published soon and we can debate the issue further in the House in the near future.

Chris Andrews (Dublin South East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am delighted to have an opportunity to contribute to the debate as a former member of the authority during my time as a Dublin city councillor. It is important to note that many good initiatives were undertaken in the docklands leading to extensive community development, which transformed a derelict area into a vibrant community both on the north side and the south side. Deputy Costello identified a number of projects on the north side that were not undertaken but the docklands must be considered in its entirely. With regard to housing provision, it transformed people's lives, giving them great self-esteem. They moved from miserable accommodation in the locality to decent, good quality accommodation and that has made a difference to individuals and the community at large.

The Minister touched on a number of achievements in education and the authority's positive contribution in facilitating sporting organisations and groups. Children and parents worked together on different projects to build their relationships, including fathers and daughters. A new theatre will open in the area, which is positive, and various art exhibitions are held there, which have made a difference to the arts community. The docklands is a good template for future planning because it integrated the existing small community into the new larger community. The joining of the old community with the new vibrant community was almost seamless. This did not happen in other developments. As I stated at the joint committee meeting last week, there was a sense in the community at the time that this positive community development should be extended to Poolbeg. People in Ringsend and further afield on both sides of the river said this made sense because it has worked.

There are serious issues and Deputy Hogan's Bill has merit but it is great in hindsight to be able to say it was not a good idea. This development should be considered as a template for an extension to Poolbeg. I stated at last week's committee meeting that the merger of the authority with Dublin City Council should be examined. This proposal has merit in that there is a great deal of crossover between both bodies. However, the chairman made a strong case for retaining the authority as a separate entity. It would be clean and clear.

Deputy Hogan's Bill has merit but we have to wait on the two reports commissioned by the Minister. The Bill is premature but not without merit.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Acting Chairman for his indulgence.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A plenary indulgence.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yesterday was a good day for Dublin's docklands. It marked the opening of the red line Luas extension from Busaras and Connolly Station to The Point. The provision of high-capacity, frequent and reliable public transport to the heart of the Dublin docklands on the north side of the river can only be positive. It will be good for the residents of East Wall and for the rest of us. It will take many cars off the quays and improve matters.

The journey along the Luas red line extension traces the rise and fall of Ireland's economic successes and failures over the past 20 years. It begins with the Irish Financial Services Centre, a fairly bland corporate group of buildings. I am not a great fan of their architecture and they are fairly soulless and dull at night. However, as one continues to Mayor Square one sees a bit of a buzz. There is the National College of Ireland, the former National College for Industrial Relations. People live over restaurants and bars and there is a range of activities there. In many ways, it is a very good model of urban living for the 21st century. A bit further on is the National Convention Centre. I am not a great fan of its architecture or of the proposals to put in place many high-rise hotels there. At the next stop is the concrete hulk of Seanie FitzPatrick's Anglo Irish Bank headquarters. That in itself tells the tale of the excess of economic development in Ireland.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Fair play to Seanie.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It tells many tales about what went wrong in recent years.

The final stop is at The Point and there to greet us on the journey we took was Harry Crosbie, who was grinning from ear to ear. One could see the dollar signs in front of his eyes and in fairness I wish him well. He has been a strong advocate of development in Dublin's docklands over the past 20 to 25 years. He put his money where his mouth was and is, and fair dues to him. I wish him well and I believe he will be more successful with what is happening there at present.

It is worth dwelling on what worked well and what worked badly for the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. It worked well under Ruairí Quinn's vision of a stand-alone State authority that would assist in the development of a run-down area. To quite a degree, the planning powers have worked well. Where it went wrong was in corporate governance. I do not see anything wrong with appointing as directors people who bring with them their wealth of experience in the financial or banking sector. However, something seemed to go wrong when conflicts of interest arose on the board of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. In a country as small as Ireland, there are conflicts of interest every day of the week. The trick is to declare them and put them on the table. If there is a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest one leaves the room. I am not convinced that happened at the board meetings of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Cuffe can vote for the Bill.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is where we need to lay down a very strong marker on how we govern and how business is conducted in the boardroom. Fine Gael's proposal to bring the Dublin Docklands Development Authority under the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General may not be a move in the right direction because it begs the question where do we stop. Do we bring Bord Gais, the ESB and every authority under the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General?

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We call it accountability.

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Transparency.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

For a party that prides itself on being pro-business and removing red tape and regulation, would its proposal before us today not add another layer of complexity to development? That is why I will not vote for it.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The original cop-out. I am disappointed.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let us improve corporate governance but adding more layers of bureaucracy for businesses during a very difficult time, as Deputy Hogan's proposal does, is not the way to go. His motivation is honourable and I respect him as an individual but the Bill is heading in the wrong direction.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What is the right way?

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am bound to tell Deputy Cuffe that the Luas which serves the docklands also goes to Tallaght.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It does.

Paul Gogarty (Dublin Mid West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I knew the Acting Chairman would get it in.

Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Not only does it go to Tallaght it brings one from Tallaght in the space of 58 minutes. Putting better public transport in place between Tallaght and The Point can only be good.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

And improved architecture.

Cyprian Brady (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In recent weeks and months we have had much discussion, much of it negative, on the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. I want to concentrate on the positives. Since 1997, I have had personal experience of the huge benefits the authority has brought to the docklands on both sides of the River Liffey, as Deputy Chris Andrews mentioned, which were derelict and deprived areas. It has made a huge positive contribution to the development of those areas. All that positivity and progress is being lost.

Public consultation and community input have always played a part in the positive work in the docklands. The local community is represented on the advisory council, and not just by individuals from the community but also by elected public representatives in the form of local councillors. Statutory and voluntary agencies are also involved as well as the authority itself. It has always been a platform for communities in the area to put forward their points of view and ensure they are not being trodden on. This type of community consultation and facilitation is a model which is being examined in other parts of the world and it came from the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.

Various improvements and changes that have taken place have been mentioned and I will go through a few of them briefly. Hundreds of families and individuals are now in sustainable high-quality accommodation in what was a deprived derelict area. A vast number of community development programmes have taken place in recent years with the various communities in the area. These have proven hugely successful and of huge benefit not just to young and older people but to the community as a whole. We must continue with this.

I remember when the Irish Financial Services Centre was a hole in the ground. A local employment contract was signed by the developers and local people were employed. That continued into the development of the docklands. It has proven hugely successful. I remember a lady from the Sheriff Street area comparing it to the 1940s and 1950s when people walked over the bridge at Sheriff Street to go to work in the mornings. This was happening again in the docklands area with people going to banks, offices and hotels. There was employment for people who for generations had no options and nowhere to go.

Perhaps the biggest change and impact of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority is in the area of education. Children in the docklands, particularly in the north inner city where I spend much time, are better educated, more confident and have more choices than before. Leaving education at junior certificate level or at the ages of 12, 13 or 14 to go out to try to earn money for one's family is no longer an issue in these areas.

In the 12 years since the Dublin Docklands Development Authority came into being, a vibrant, sustainable and integrated community has been created. That fact has become lost during the debate. It has always been my opinion that buildings do not make communities, rather it is people who do so. I grew up in the docklands area and I have monitored what occurred there in recent years. It was only in the past two years that financial and governance issues arose in respect of the authority. During the previous ten years, however, the authority made major progress and its work had a major impact on the local communities.

Whatever about corporate governance issues, there is no doubt but that the interests of the communities to which I refer are being forgotten. The debate on where we go from here smacks of closing the gate after the horse has bolted. There are corporate governance mechanisms in place and there are rules and regulations with regard to how State and semi-State bodies are run. We must concentrate on continuing to support the positive work that has been done by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority over the past 12 years.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Terence Flanagan and Kieran O'Donnell.

I am absolutely amazed by the reaction of the Government to this Bill, which was introduced by my colleague, Deputy Phil Hogan. When I first saw it, my immediate reaction - on a completely non-political basis - was to say, "Hear, hear, it is time this was done". The legislation constitutes a necessary item of reform and I would have thought the debate on it would have been short-circuited by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government indicating that the Government was prepared to accept it in principle, with the proviso that it could be tweaked on Committee Stage, and allow Second Stage to pass.

The legislation before the House has been referred to as a Fine Gael Bill. In that context, Deputy Hogan considered what happened with the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and at the Committee of Public Accounts, which reached an all-party agreement that legislation to deal with this matter should be introduced. However, such legislation never emerged. All Deputy Hogan did, therefore, was to draft the necessary Bill in respect of the all-party agreement to the effect that the Dublin Docklands Development Authority be placed under the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General. In such circumstances, I cannot understand how any Member of the House can vote against the Bill.

As already stated, the Bill implements an all-party decision. Why was such a decision made? It happened because of people's horror with regard to the picture that emerged of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. It is clear that drastic action is necessary. I have been a Member of the House for many years and having participated in the activities of the Committee of Public Accounts, I have become somewhat battle-hardened. However, I have never come across anything quite as bad as what occurred in this instance.

What makes matters worse is that this is a body which had such a bright start. Everyone accepts and agrees that it did such marvellous work. In the past six or seven years, however, it squandered the capital it built up in the context of its reputation, good name and the good work it did previously. This happened because the authority was taken over by the Dublin equivalent of those who previously occupied the Fianna Fáil tent at the Galway races. If one examines the connections among the board, Anglo Irish Bank and the developers involved, one will see a common thread emerge.

The horrifying scale of this scandal means that the taxpayer has been left completely exposed. The amounts involved are quite enormous. I refer here to the massive sum - some 26% of the whole - used to purchase the Irish Glass Bottle Company site in Ringsend and also to the loan facility, the soft loan, the guarantee and the money borrowed from Anglo Irish Bank, which is now owned by the State. It is something of a financial carousel. As the authority is not paying up in respect of this site, Anglo Irish Bank, on behalf of the State, will be obliged to foot the bill. If the carousel completes a further turn, it will be passed on to NAMA which, again, is guaranteed by the taxpayer, who is being exposed in respect of enormous sums of money.

The question arises as to the action we should take on this matter. An investigation must take place with regard to what occurred in the past. However, that is not the issue. In that context, the real issue is how we ensure that events of this nature do not happen in the future. The Comptroller and Auditor General has a role to play. I have witnessed the latter's work in respect of many State bodies. A recent example in this regard, which garnered a great deal of publicity, was his investigation of FÁS. The Comptroller and Auditor General carries out forensic examinations in respect of the relevant details relating to any matters of concern and the Committee of Public Accounts can then not merely expose some of the horrific activities which might have taken place, but also ensure that a system be put in place to prevent any recurrence of such activities.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government indicated that he cannot accept this Bill, which was introduced by Fine Gael but which contemplates an all-party decision reached by the Committee of Public Accounts, and put forward a number of reasons in this regard. In that context, he referred to the State's code of corporate governance and indicated that the Dublin Docklands Development Authority is subject to it. The code states that bodies such as the authority should conduct their business in such a way that conflicts of interests can be avoided.

When I began to consider the activities of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, and in light of the code of corporate governance to which I refer, I was stunned when I discovered that it is the planning authority for the area that comes within its remit. It, therefore, acquires properties on the basis of joint ventures and it then, in effect, provides planning permission in respect of developments relating to such properties.

This blows a total hole in the stipulation that there should be no conflicts of interest. I cannot understand how any Government could permit the coming into being of such a scenario. What is worse is that the Fianna Fáil-led Government extended the authority's borrowing limit in order that it might raise the funds necessary to allow it, on a joint-venture basis, to become involved in acquiring properties in respect of which it could then issue planning permissions. How can this be justified under any system of democratic governance? The Government bears major responsibility in respect of what occurred in this instance. What I have just described strikes me as being one of the worst aspects of this entire affair.

It is clear that other elements of the State code of corporate governance, such as those relating to proper procurement practices, the rules relating to participation in joint ventures, etc., were not complied with. The Minister indicated that the accounts were properly audited. I will not criticise those from KPMG who were only doing their job in this regard. KPMG did its work, properly and efficiently, in the context of producing an audit and informing us as to what is the bad news. However, the Comptroller and Auditor General does not operate in the same way as KPMG. The latter deals with its client, namely, the authority, whereas the Comptroller and Auditor General holds a constitutional office and works on behalf of everyone in the country who pays tax. That is why we want the Comptroller and Auditor General included.

The third point raised by the Minister in defence against this Bill is that there is an oversight arrangement with the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. He misconstrues entirely the role of an Oireachtas committee such as the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in contrast to the role of the Committee of Public Accounts. There are two significant aspects to the Committee of Public Accounts. It works with the Comptroller and Auditor General, who undertakes forensic analysis and produces detailed figures. The Committee of Public Accounts operates on a non-political basis. It leaves politics to the line committees. The politics of this issue is a matter for the Joint Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. We need a procedure so that the figures for this authority can be forensically examined by an independent body and the matter can be dealt with by the Committee of Public Accounts. The Comptroller and Auditor General is the obvious body for this task.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, resembles St Augustine, who asked to be made pure but not yet.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is right. It did occur to me.

Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Why does he adopt this approach if such a horror tale is unfolding before the House in support of Deputy Hogan's Bill?

The Minister referred to the appointment of Professor Niamh Brennan. The only ray of hope I saw from this Government in respect of this horror story was the appointment of Professor Niamh Brennan. I do not know her personally although I spent a number of years crossing swords with her husband and enjoying it. Anything I have heard about her points to someone who is sincere, dedicated and capable but she is the chairperson of the authority and is committed to a certain job in this respect. She is not someone who can forensically examine the authority from the outside and report to an outside body. She must report to the board. I commend her appointment; she now has a job to do and should get on with it.

We still need an external examination of the activities of this authority. The case for the appointment of the Comptroller and Auditor General is unanswerable. We are not talking about small money; it is a substantial sum amounting to hundreds of millions of euros. The way the contingent debt for the taxpayer was accumulated points to a clear breach of the State's code of corporate governance and to deals that are suspicious at the very least and will unfold as corrupt. Who will lay the tale before this House and before the Committee of Public Accounts unless there is an outside examination of the entire activity of the authority?

I have been a Member of this House for quite some time and I want to see a proper process and procedure. I do not know the details on the ground but I will leave that to my Dublin colleagues. I am well aware of the excellent work of this authority and I would like to see it fully back on track. This cannot be done until the financial boil is lanced. The way to ensure that this does not happen to the authority again, or that it operates as a warning to other authorities that may go down the same path, is to adopt the principle of the Fine Gael Bill.

The Bill proposed by Deputy Hogan is the correct approach and I do not say this from a political point of view. It is the right thing to do in this terrible situation of financial exposure for the taxpayer. It will achieve the effect of ensuring the full facts are disclosed, to which the public is entitled. The public is also entitled to an assurance that this scandal will not be repeated. The way to do so is to adopt the proposal in Deputy Hogan's Bill and to accept the proposal that the Comptroller and Auditor General can audit the accounts and produce a full report so that the matter can be dealt with before the Committee of Public Accounts.

Kieran O'Donnell (Limerick East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to share time with Deputy Terence Flanagan.

I support what Deputy Hogan proposes. This is a reasonable and practical Bill and I commend him on it. What is required is for the Comptroller and Auditor General to audit the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and examine the purchase of the Irish Glass Bottle site. The scale of the figures involved is amazing. That is why Deputy Hogan feels so strongly that the Comptroller and Auditor General should be appointed.

The financial statement of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority refers to net assets on the balance sheet going from €177 million in 2007 to €26 million in 2008. The consolidated balance sheet has gone from €177 billion in 2007 to a negative €48.5 million 2008. The original legislation provides that if the Dublin Docklands Development Authority cannot repay its debt it reverts to the central Exchequer. That is the key factor. We seek to protect the public purse. It is alarming that this site was bought in October 2006, when there were signals of major problems with the property market.

At the time the chairman of the authority, Mr. Lar Bradshaw, was on the board of Anglo Irish Bank and Mr. Seán FitzPatrick was on the board of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority while he was chairman of the board of Anglo Irish Bank. Some €296 million was given to Becbay Limited, a joint venture company, by Anglo Irish Bank. Over the same period, according to page 63 of the accounts, some €43 million was loaned from the Dublin Docklands Development Authority to Becbay Limited as an interest-free loan to part fund the development of the Irish Glass Bottle site. On what was the €43 million spent? Did the taxpayer get value for money and did the Dublin Docklands Development Authority get value for money?

Examining the 2008 accounts, some €118 million of the €213 million loss incurred by the business was contributed by Becbay Limited. The share of the operating loss of the joint venture was €74.8 million. The full loan of €43.04 million was written off. Page 42 of the accounts refers to an auditor report by KPMG. It is not qualified but lays an emphasis on a matter in respect of a growing concern and refers to note 1. This deals with Becbay's ability to continue to trade. The consolidated balance sheet is minus €48 million. The company alone is plus €26 million. It is critical that the Comptroller and Auditor General undertake a proper, independent investigation on behalf of the taxpayer, without detracting from the work of KPMG.

Professor Niamh Brennan has taken steps to consider corporate governance. Already €118 million of taxpayers' money has gone down the tubes in this investment in Becbay and the Irish Glass Bottle Company site. There is a contingent liability in the accounts of a guarantee of €29 million plus 26% of the interest incurred by Becbay. In 2008 we lost €118 million and may lose another €29 million plus interest. The Comptroller and Auditor General must investigate this loss.

I am surprised that the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government last night did not accept the merit of Deputy Hogan's proposals which are very clear-cut and would look after the taxpayers' interests. We want the DDDA to function as it was intended it should but there are many unanswered questions about the common membership of the boards of Anglo Irish Bank and the DDDA. Why was €43 million given to Becbay? What was the money used for? It has been fully written off so it was of no value. There is an emphasis on material in the accounts which is based on worry about the DDDA as a going concern and the implications for Becbay. It is critical that to protect the taxpayer the Government support this Bill which is concise, direct and in the interests of the taxpayer. Anything less would be completely unacceptable.

Terence Flanagan (Dublin North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I commend Deputy Hogan on bringing forward this Bill. It is very worthwhile to ensure that the Comptroller and Auditor General has the powers to inspect the books and records of the DDDA and to investigate some of the wrongdoing and corruption alleged to have taken place there.

I commend the good work of the DDDA since 1997. It has rejuvenated the docklands which were a no-go area. It is doing much good work within the community. A cloud now hangs over the authority because of the Irish Glass Bottle Company site deal. Many questions remain unanswered. Deputy Hogan has been investigating this for the best part of one year but has been frustrated by the little information he has received under the Freedom of Information Act. Some of the information has been blacked out. That needs to be examined. There is a lack of accountability and the board has hidden behind a veil of secrecy, like another organisation which has also been investigated.

We welcome the new chairman of the DDDA who has been in place since March 2009. She had a hard job in trying to put together the 2008 accounts because she was not in post then, and she has a hard job ahead of her. The DDDA reported a loss of €213 million in 2008 which was the first time it was so financially badly hit. A total of €186 million of this loss is attributed to its agreement to purchase the Irish Glass Bottle Company site. Questions remain to be answered as to why it took that risk and went into a joint venture with other developers when it did not need to do so. We need to know whether there was any connection between the directors and those who benefited from the sale of this site and the DDDA. There was a serious conflict of interest when directors of the authority were receiving loans from Anglo Irish Bank and were reckless with the money. The directors must be accountable. The Government should pursue these people and hold them responsible for their bad decision-making.

The Irish Glass Bottle Company site was purchased at the height of the boom for €412 million, which is equivalent to €17.2 million per acre, an obscene sum of money to pay. The value of the site has dropped dramatically and it is worth only €50 million now. The taxpayer will have to pick up the tab to ensure that the authority continues in business while its directors have not been held accountable and nobody is taking full responsibility. Successive Ministers for the Environment were allegedly responsible for the DDDA but were making appointments which breached good corporate governance practice. They need to be made answerable and say why they made those decisions and what level of scrutiny took place before those appointments were made. The Minister and his predecessors must answer questions about the borrowing limit for the authority which increased specifically for the purchase of the Irish Glass Bottle Company site.

Why was the €43 million loan from the DDDA for the purchase of this site interest-free and unsecured? These are the kind of questions that must be answered. That it has been written off in the 2008 accounts means that it was given with very bad judgment. People must be held responsible for that. The DDDA has done much good work in the area. Tax breaks played a major part in the development of the Irish Financial Services Centre and the rejuvenation process. There is a Luas line there and the new Samuel Beckett Bridge is to be opened but questions about some of the shady deals done hang over all this good work .

There is a fear that there is cronyism in the way the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is appointing directors to the authority. That can only be stopped by open and transparent scrutiny of appointment of directors by the relevant Oireachtas committee where they are probed and answer serious questions to ensure that they are capable of doing the job and have the proper qualification to do so. The new chairman has a good reputation and will no doubt get to the bottom of the problems that have arisen. The Comptroller and Auditor General plays a crucial role in the investigation of various Departments and agencies such as FÁS, gets to the root of the problem and is not afraid to state who was at fault. That needs to happen.

We know the authority is in dire straits and that it is cutting costs in a way that is affecting community events and activities within the docklands at present. It is the ordinary people who are paying the price because of the recklessness by various directors of the authority. As we know, the authority is moving back from its new headquarters to its old headquarters. There have been bad management decisions and, specifically, Anglo Irish Bank officials have made many mistakes. The real issue is that there is no adequate regulation and no proper governance or accountability of Government in regard to this body. My party recently moved a Private Members' motion in regard to making CIE more accountable and ensuring that parliamentary questions are answered. That needs to happen with regard to the docklands authority. There is no political accountability and no one accepts responsibility, which is the same old story with regard to this Government.

The docklands authority has done much good work. However, it is a quango and should be under the authority of the Dublin City Council which would have much tighter control and give less opportunity for a situation like this to happen again, which we clearly do not want. I hope the Minister will support Deputy Hogan's Bill, which aims to get the Comptroller and Auditor General to immediately investigate the wrongdoing in this authority.

Michael Finneran (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Minister, Deputy Gormley, indicated last night, the Government is firmly committed to ensuring that the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, like all State bodies, should be subject to highest standards of corporate governance and review. Since the authority's chair assumed her role in March of this year, she has undertaken a fundamental review of procedures and processes within the authority and is currently finalising two major reports on corporate governance for the Minister.

In that context, I would reiterate the Government's position that consideration of this Private Members' Bill is premature. A decision as to whether the governance and reporting arrangements of the authority should be changed, for example, whether to bring it within the remit of the Comptroller and Auditor General, should be informed by, and not pre-empt, the extensive work that is already underway.

In framing our response to the chair's corporate governance reviews, which I believe are due to be submitted to the Minister later this month, the Government will also have to weigh up whether it would be appropriate or feasible for the Comptroller and Auditor General to have such an auditing role, given that the authority has generally been self-funding and that the Comptroller and Auditor General's role specifically applies to bodies which receive at least 50% of their funds in a particular year from the Exchequer. The House should, nonetheless, be heartened by the Minister's commitment to keeping this matter under review when he is considering what action and measures will be taken to address these reports.

I endorse the Minister, Deputy Gormley's, assertion, and that of many colleagues on both sides of the House, that the future focus of the authority must be on its key regeneration functions. As Minister of State responsible for housing and urban renewal, I have long had an interest in the extensive regeneration initiatives undertaken in the Docklands area over the past few years. When I gave the keynote address at the seventh annual Dublin Docklands social regeneration conference earlier this year, I was struck by the scale of the achievements over the past ten years and the tangible, positive impact that the regeneration programme has had on the lives of its citizens through access to services and education, to community facilities and to better housing.

Many of the social regeneration initiatives have been implemented by the docklands community leaders, in partnership with the authority, which has set standards for similar initiatives in other parts of the country. This is particularly true in regard to the 20% social and affordable housing initiative and the widespread use of community consultative fora.

Many Deputies have highlighted that the mistakes and miscalculations in regard to the authority's business and investment practices must not be allowed to adversely impact on the docklands and local residents who are paying the price for the behaviour of others. I agree the authority must restore the confidence of its key stakeholders - the local communities in the docklands, those who work there and the general public - as well as the confidence of the Government and the House. While the authority has had to scale back many of its activities in these financially constrained times, it has rightly recognised that it must strive as far as possible to continue the great community and education work and maintain the outstanding results that have already been achieved.

Transparency and accountability are cornerstones to restoring this trust. I am confident that the Minister and the Government will take the necessary steps quickly and decisively to address the concerns raised in the House during this debate. However, for the reasons I have outlined, the Government cannot at this stage accept the provisions of this Bill.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I congratulate Deputy Phil Hogan for bringing forward the Bill, which is opportune, timely and necessary. It is necessary for a number of reasons, but not because the development of Docklands was wrong. However, the development of the docklands has been very positive. It is very important that, in association with all such positive development, we would have a situation that is clearly transparent and in which accountability is clear to all, and this should also include accountability to this House. Unfortunately, that has not been the case.

The central purpose of the Bill is that the Committee of Public Accounts would assume the role it normally has in such situations, assert itself and bring the Comptroller and Auditor General's report through the committee. As a former member of that committee, I assure the House this is a sure-fire way to ensure that everything is above aboard and seen to be so.

I am appalled at the Augustinian attitude of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. St. Augustine said, "Lord, make me pure, but not yet". I cannot understand why the Minister told the House yesterday that this was a great Bill which contained positive elements, but that, at the same time, it was not the right time for it. There is no better time than the present. This is what has left this country the way it is at present. It is up to its neck in debt because nobody had the guts to stand up and say that now is the time to do something about it, to interfere and to introduce accountability and transparency. That is what the problem of this country has always been.

Unfortunately, when the Committee of Public Accounts set out to examine any such situation, it is after the event. Why is this? It is because Ministers do not want to account to this House for expenditure within their respective Departments. It is intolerable that any Government or Minister in any capacity at any time would approve of a programme of development anywhere that would involve public expenditure for which that Minister was not accountable to the House on a daily basis. Multiply the daily expenditure in any Department and one will get the totality of expenditure for a year. If any company, body or group of agencies gets it into its head that it does not have to account for day-to-day expenditure, the culmination of which is a massive budget, then all is lost before we begin.

Rhett Butler once said to Scarlet O'Hara, when she was commenting negatively about one his unpatriotic investments, of which he had many, that there are two occasions when one can make money in a country: one is when the country is making up, the other is when it is breaking up. I do not know if this country is breaking up. However, I know that many people have seen opportunities that are not necessarily above board. This does not just apply to the Dublin Docklands Development Authority but to many other areas of expenditure as well.

I hope the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the various speakers on the Government side who have recognised the merit of the Bill put forward by Deputy Phil Hogan will vote in support of it and show they are in favour of honesty, integrity and positive development in this country and, most of all, accountability.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank all the speakers who have contributed to the debate. I thank the Labour Party and Sinn Féin for their support. I also thank Deputy Seán Fleming, the Chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, and the members of that committee for their assistance in teasing out these issues over the past year. It has been ploughing a lonely furrow for the last year to ascertain what has been going on in the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, particularly in terms of property transactions. Having visited the area with the Oireachtas committee, one would be impressed with the community development, education, social regeneration and some of the programmes that are helping young people to find employment. Those were included in the mission statement under the legislation in 1997 but regrettably it was hi-jacked by people for personal gain.

The new chairman of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, Professor Niamh Brennan, addressed the committee last week and answered some of the questions. One could see she is having great difficulty getting to the root causes of some of the problems. She will have to come back to the committee in due course and report on the 2009 accounts and indicate to us the contents of two important reports she has commissioned in corporate governance and financial probity. Those reports will assist the committee in concluding its work satisfactorily and help to ensure that we do our job properly in this House - representing the taxpayer and securing accountability for money that has been allocated and spent.

The Bill Fine Gael is putting forward is a small token in terms of honesty, transparency and accountability. Since 1922, the mechanism has existed for us to examine, through the Comptroller and Auditor General Act and the Committee of Public Accounts, what has gone on in each Government Department and agency under its control. This agency for some reason, perhaps deliberately, was given a commercial remit and was left out of the scope of the Comptroller and Auditor General. I do not know why that was done but when we see what happened in the past 12 years, we can understand that it may have been a deliberate attempt to obfuscate accountability and responsibility for financial probity.

In issues related to finance, property development and corporate governance, this organisation has not been run properly. Fine Gael seeks to put that right with this Bill and ensure it will not happen again in that or any other organisation. If it is good enough for the State to have the IDA or Shannon Development as property holding companies, subject to the Comptroller and Auditor General, what is wrong with putting the Dublin Docklands Development Authority under the same control?

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government had the opportunity to put himself at a considerable distance politically and otherwise from the people who caused this problem and who were engaged in the financial skullduggery that has gone on in the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, who had common directorships in organisations throughout the city and even had the assistance of Anglo Irish Bank to assist them to fund their pet projects. I outlined in detail yesterday some of the trickery used by these individuals. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government knows well those people are a perfect example of what has been wrong with this country in the last number of years. They are a perfect example of what has brought us to this day where there will be such a difficult budget this afternoon. We are here because of their irresponsible practices, lack of accountability and inadequate policy decisions that were made contrary to the interests of the taxpayer.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Rhett Butler.

Charlie O'Connor (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Please let Deputy Hogan speak without interruption.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am merely mentioning Rhett Butler. I am being helpful.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister decided to take the side of those people, and I regret that because he was not there when the authority was established. He now has an opportunity to secure a Government commitment to investigate what has gone on and to put things right, rather than taking the side of those people who were involved in malpractice, resulting in the taxpayer being down to the tune of €213 million. That is a sad reflection on the Minister.

It is an irresponsible decision by the Minister and the Government and it does not do him justice. I hear him reading these fine sounding sentences about the need for financial probity and scrutiny, but now is the time to stand up and be counted and to accept the Fine Gael Bill. He can do that without any political difficulty because he can accept the Second Stage of the legislation and if he has any difficulties, he can make amendments on Committee Stage, part and parcel of the legislative process. We in Fine Gael will accommodate him in that regard. He will then also have the benefit of the two internal reports to make the necessary changes in accountability that we seek in this Bill. What is he afraid of that stops him from ensuring we have proper accountability? I can only conclude that the classic see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil mechanism has overcome him and that he does not want to find out about things he is suspicious of. That is not the right way to ensure proper accountability for agencies.

Deputy Cuffe said that something seemed to go wrong in the Dublin Docklands Development Authority.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ouch.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On a professional basis and as a former member of Dublin City Council, he knows exactly what went wrong. He and Deputy Gogarty had the opportunity today, after making their St. Augustine remarks, to say they would support this Bill and assert the Green Party in Government, rather than operating as Pontius Pilate on accountability in the House. They know in their heart and soul that this Bill seeks to do the right thing for the taxpayer. The reason they are satisfied not to do it, however, is that they do no want investigation, accountability or redress from those who caused this problem.

I do not believe the Dublin Docklands Development Authority, which has been responsible over ten or 12 years for this problem, is the body to step back from financial ruin and resolve the issues. Those who caused the problem have great difficulty in solving it because there are so many vested interests and a pressing need to vindicate their previous actions. An independent assessment, therefore, of matters in the Dublin Docklands Development Authority is necessary. What better mechanism than the Comptroller and Auditor General, the mechanism set up by this House in 1922 to ensure these matters are fully investigated and that has stood the test of time and where Members of this House can participate as the independent accountancy and auditing arm of the State?

I agree with Deputy Cyprian Brady that there were positive developments in the community and social regeneration. The big boys in Anglo Irish Bank and the board of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority should be his target. They lost control of the organisations original objectives and used the property development and planning function for their own ends.

I want to see those who hijacked the organisation and caused these problems brought to book. I want to see redress, with those who were on the board of this company scrutinised. If they cannot be brought to book through proper structures, we are telling them they got away with again. The nod and wink philosophy particularly evident in the transactions and policies on the property development side of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority must stop.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has a great opportunity to ensure that there will be proper investigation of financial probity and the accountability structure in this House and to allow the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and the people responsible for placing a burden of €213 million on the taxpayer to be brought to account. He should support this Bill and let it pass Second Stage. The Dublin Docklands Development Authority should function under the same structures as all other State agencies.