Joe O'Toole (Independent)

The motion has prompted many levels of agreement on all sides of the House, but we should cast our minds back. It is not that long since a Taoiseach addressed a St. Patrick's day group in Washington with the infamous words that income taxation was still something of a novelty in Ireland. As we have been finding out ever since, that is part of the problem. There was a macho view until very recently that it was a great thing not to pay taxes. That view continues to be maintained in many places. I dislike the focus in this debate on those decent public servants who work in the Revenue Commissioners and do their utmost in the face of all sorts of difficult circumstances. Those circumstances are often created by Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas who make regular representations at senior level on issues of tax which they should not go anywhere near.

Since I saw the film "Al Capone", I have held a view on the best way to deal with such people. He was finally brought to justice by the US Department of the Treasury rather than by armed agents of the FBI. I spoke recently to the senior Northern Ireland police officer dealing with the establishment of a copy-cat version of our Criminal Assets Bureau. He said that in all his investigations and discussions with people he has come to one conclusion, namely, that in terms of dealing with violent criminals or with those criminals who are not tax compliant, he would prefer to see the latter poor and out of prison than rich and in prison. I feel strongly about that and would prefer above all to see such people stripped of their assets.

I appreciate the point made earlier by Senator Higgins suggesting a closer tie-in — I accept it is there, and growing — between the Criminal Assets Bureau and the Revenue Commissioners. They should work hand in hand. We should recognise too that this is partly a resources problem. On three occasions in the last year I have raised in this House the lack of support within the Criminal Assets Bureau. The situation has marginally improved in recent times, but when I checked within the last year, there were only either two or three detectives attached to the Criminal Assets Bureau to deal with the biggest crime growth area in our country. That is a reflection on the political system for which the Government must take responsibility. It is not good enough that this situation should be allowed continue.

We also need to look at the issue of naming and shaming. There have been improvements but we need to consider the issue further. Naming and shaming is very effective nowadays but would not have been so 15 years ago. Let us be honest with ourselves. People who evaded tax 15 or 20 years ago were almost heroes. People did not know or did not acknowledge that the money was ultimately coming out of their own pockets. There has been a sea change in attitude. I agree with the motion in that there has been a certain duplicity in the political view of this issue. That comes into play very often when one talks of compliance and is dealing with the issue of paying taxes and giving powers to the Revenue Commissioners; people then talk of the difficulty of attracting foreign direct investment. That argument has been used time and again.

The other argument is that the country would fall apart if one of the major banks were found to be involved in any type of fraud or activity that was less than compliant. That attitude still exists. I came across a lot of it when dealing with the audit review group. In his speech, the Minister of State said we are now part of Europe, and could look at the matter. That is no help. In Germany, listed companies on the Dax, the German stock market, might have to comply with four different sets of compliance from different backgrounds, states and places. There is no co-ordination between the auditing standards boards of the US Securities and Exchange Commission in Washington and the equivalent groups in the UK and the euro area. Those are three huge areas which cannot get together.

I do not know how many years it took us to get people to decide on the colour of a passport. This matter is similar. The idea that we cannot do it is quite extraordinary. There are people in this city working in auditing for the Revenue Commissioners and others who have different standards with which they must comply depending on who they are doing the work for. It is a mess. The only positive aspect I can see is that in recent times many people who work for Elan — not far from the constituency of the Minister of State, Deputy de Valera — were saved by this. As Elan had to comply with the more stringent compliance regulations of the Irish authorities, it was able to prove it was not on the same wavelength as those companies perpetrating the major frauds that were going on in the US at the time, regarding the selling of advance royalties back to themselves and paying the money over again. There are huge problems in this area which will not be dealt with until we get some sort of co-ordination. That is an issue in which I would like our EU Presidency to show some interest.

I agree with the tenet of the motion, that not enough people have been jailed. More should be jailed, and if that does not happen, we will all look like fools for putting up with the situation.

I do not agree with the criticism of the Revenue Commissioners. They have been invested by us with the power to make judgment calls, which they can and do make. We do not know the inside stories. For every case we might hear of, I could match it with another. Within the last two weeks I was talking to a Minister who told me of someone in his constituency who was going to lose his farm because of his offshore involvements some ten years ago. That is an example of the Revenue Commissioners holding a line. The significant fact is that every politician who was in that circle of discussion felt sorry for that ordinary farmer who was going to lose his farm. I do not blame them, and I felt sorry too. On the other hand, it was the Revenue Commissioners who were taking a stand on the issue and who were not prepared to back off in such situations, just as they never do. Every time they take a strong line they are equally criticised.

This is not an easy issue. The motion has been hugely important and I congratulate the Labour group on tabling it. As Senator Mansergh said, it raises issues which we must address. I do not know the easy answers. More resources are called for, along with a cleaner system of reportage back to both Houses, so that we have a clearer understanding of what the Revenue Commissioners do. They have not helped themselves by their rejection of the Ombudsman on two occasions in the last year. That does not help their public image.