Dáil debates

Tuesday, 15 January 2019

Ceisteanna - Questions

Commissions of Investigation

4:10 pm

Photo of Mary Lou McDonaldMary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

1. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the status of the commission of investigation into IBRC. [53031/18]

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach the status of the commission of investigation into IBRC; and the projected costs in this regard. [1292/19]

Photo of Leo VaradkarLeo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

Following consultations with the Opposition parties by the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, the IBRC commission of investigation was established in June 2015. The commission is entirely independent in its work and Mr. Justice Brian Cregan is its sole member. The commission is required to investigate certain transactions, activities and management decisions at the IBRC. In its first module it is investigating the Siteserv transaction which has been identified as a matter of significant public concern in Dáil Éireann.

Deputies will recall that following determinations made by the commission that banker-client confidentiality and legal professional privilege applied in relation to certain documents supplied to it, the then Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, invited views from the Opposition parties on the issues arising and, following consultations with them, the Commission of Investigation (IBRC) Act 2016 was enacted by the Oireachtas in July 2016. The Act is bespoke legislation which gave a new legal basis to the commission’s investigations. Deputies will also recall that arising from issues raised by the commission, its terms of reference were also amended by the Oireachtas in 2016 following consultations with the Opposition parties.

Following requests from the commission and further consultations with Opposition parties, the timeframe for the commission’s report has been extended on several occasions. On 23 November 2018, the commission submitted its fifth interim report to me and requested a further extension of its deadline for reporting until the end of March 2020. I consulted with Opposition representatives on this request and there was a shared strong concern about the level of progress achieved by the commission to date, the timeframe now proposed for concluding the first module of the commission’s work and the risks of further delays and cost escalations. It was agreed to request a further interim report from the commission under section 33 of the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004. This report should include any interim findings or conclusions which the commission is in a position to make at this stage; any options which the commission believes would reduce the timeframe and-or cost for production of a final report on the first module of the investigation; the commission’s view of risks to completion of the first module of the investigation within the requested new timeframe, that is, the end of March 2020; and the commission’s best estimate of the likely final costs of the first module. I also extended the commission’s timeframe until the end of March 2019. A decision on any further extension of the commission’s timeframe will be taken, in consultation with Opposition party representatives, after the interim report has been received.

From the time of its establishment to the end of 2018 the commission spent approximately €5.065 million on direct costs, including salaries, administration, overheads and its own legal counsel. The commission has not provided any estimate of the third party legal costs incurred to date but they are likely to be substantial and it would be prudent to assume the final cost of the commission could exceed €30 million.

Photo of Pearse DohertyPearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. As outlined, the Taoiseach received the commission's fifth interim report in November. The commission has sought an extension until the end of March 2020 but the Taoiseach has not made a decision on granting that extension at this point in time. He suggests that the commission of investigation is likely to cost in excess of €30 million and I ask him to give the House an indication of how such a figure was arrived at, given that the commission itself has not provided that estimate in its interim report. I also ask the Taoiseach to outline to the House his views on the Siteserv module. A balance must be struck here with regard to the overall work of the commission in terms of ascertaining the truth and the overall issue of costs. There is an issue of public importance at play here and the Siteserv module must be concluded. Has the Taoiseach arrived at a decision with regard to the conclusion of the Siteserv module, which is of utmost public importance and which will require an extension to the timeframe for the commission?.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach's response concerning dialogue with the commission of investigation is unclear. The whole idea behind commissions of investigation is to make inquiries quicker and more efficient. We have had five interim reports from the IBRC commission of investigation and it would be reasonable to say that none of them contains anything of great substance. The reports simply provide a chronology of what has been done to date.

Has the Taoiseach written to the commission to say that he is granting an extension until March 2019? Is that what he is telling us? Has there been any response to that, given that the commission requested an extension out to 2020? I attended the aforementioned briefing and fully appreciate the Taoiseach's concerns on this matter. There is a need to ensure that there is a full and rigorous investigation and that the full facts are known but the cost of the investigation is now likely to exceed the total value of the transactions being investigated which does not seem right. Has the Taoiseach had any response from the commission of investigation to his decision to extend its timeframe to March of this year rather than to March 2020, as requested? Will the Taoiseach put his letter to the commission and the commission's response, if any, on the public record?

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before posing my question, I would like to point out that three questions were transferred, wrongly in my view given that they related to the Taoiseach's Brexit-related meetings with Prime Ministers, to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. My office is now dealing with the relevant office and our point has been accepted but greater attention is required. I ask that the Taoiseach would keep an eye on this because I do not think that the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade is meeting Prime Ministers on the Taoiseach's behalf-----

Photo of Leo VaradkarLeo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Not that I am aware.

Photo of Micheál MartinMicheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----much as he might like to do so.

It is four years since the IBRC commission of investigation was first established. It was established for a very good reason, namely the real and increasing public concern at information emerging about IBRC's sale of public assets at rates which appeared to be well below what should have been sought and other related issues. It is now an issue of concern that an inquiry can drag on for so long and at such expense. The Taoiseach is now estimating that the commission will cost €30 million, which is extraordinary, particularly when compared to inquiries in other countries which do not take the same length of time or incur the same level of costs.

There simply must be something wrong when a commission can take years to focus on a single transaction. To put it in perspective, there appears to be little more than three months involved between the decision to put Siteserv's assets up for sale and the conclusion of that sale. We will soon be in the fifth year of investigating a transaction that took three months, which I am sure the Taoiseach will agree is absurd by any definition.

Does he have any idea what the obstacles that have been put in the path of the commission are? As it is a private rather than a public commission, we do not know if it has been delayed by lack of co-operation, legal issues or simply bad procedure driven by acting as though it were a court with powers beyond those held by a commission. What can be done to get to the bottom of this? We are owed some detailed explanations, given that we are the body charged with establishing it along with the Government. We worked in consultation with the Taoiseach's predecessor and the Taoiseach in this regard. Does he accept that it is not good enough merely to express frustration and that he has a responsibility to seek a detailed statement on why we are entering the fifth year of investigation into a transaction which took approximately three months?

4:20 pm

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I missed the Taoiseach's response, but what is important is the context of the letter he wrote to the commission about extending the timeframe. Like everyone else, I have concerns about the delay and costs, which I shared with the Taoiseach. I am also concerned that some people could be above scrutiny if we cannot reach a satisfactory conclusion on this matter.

Photo of Leo VaradkarLeo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am at a bit of a disadvantage in answering these questions because it is an independent commission under Mr. Justice Cregan and I am not in charge of it. Rather, I am just the Minister named in the Act and, therefore, I do not know, nor can I know, many of the answers to the questions that people are asking. I have extended the commission's timeframe until the end of March 2019 and requested a further interim report on the items I mentioned, namely, any interim findings or conclusions which the commission is in a position to make at this stage, any options the commission believes would reduce the timeframe, cost or both for production of a final report in the first module, the commission's view on the risks to completion of the first module of the investigation within the new requested timeframe of the end of March 2020, and the commission's best estimate of the likely final cost in the first module. That is essentially what the letter contains and I have no difficulty putting it into the public domain unless there is some legal reason as to why I cannot do so. If I have received a response, I have not yet seen it although I do not think there has been.

The costs are an estimate drawn up by my officials. In November, I indicated that the tentative estimate of the final cost of the commission would be between €20 million and €25 million, given the rate of expenditure. The commission's timeframe for reporting has been extended, at the risk of further delays and the significant third party legal costs that will arise. The commission has not provided its own estimate of the total costs, which are likely to rise from the first module. As I said in my reply, I have asked it to provide me with its best estimate in the interim report.