Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

The purpose of the motion is to allow an amendment to enable the tribunal to complete its work by 2007. This is significantly earlier than would be the case if the amendment were not made. Under the existing terms of reference for the tribunal, it is mandated to investigate any allegation of corruption associated with the planning process. The fourth interim report issued by the tribunal on 15 June of this year gave an overview of the work on hand. Although the tribunal was, of necessity, very circumspect in the language that it used, the report indicated that the tribunal still has a large volume of work on hand, which, if investigated in full, would require the tribunal to carry on until 2014 or 2015. There was some comment that it would still be in operation for the centenary of the 1916 uprising.

The tribunal itself requested a change to its terms of reference to allow it a discretion not to pursue certain lines of inquiry. If Members check the original arrangement under which the tribunal was set up, they will note that it can request changes to its terms of reference. After the tribunal's request, the Government mandated the Attorney General to consult the tribunal on changes to its terms of reference, as provided for under the 1998 tribunals legislation. This is the appropriate contact point. The Attorney General was also asked to discuss with the tribunal the impact of the Government's decision in July of this year to apply a new scale of fees to the legal teams of existing and future tribunals.

As I stated, the tribunal currently has a mandate to investigate any allegation of an act of corruption associated with the planning process. The major changes proposed, which are the subject of today's motion, will add a new paragraph J to the terms of reference. Sub-paragraph J(1) enables the tribunal to complete its current investigations into planning issues in Dublin, including the Carrickmines and Quarryvale modules and interlinked matters. Sub-paragraphs J(2) and J(7) provide for the introduction of two important deadlines. There were no deadlines previously.

Under sub-paragraph J(7), the final date for receipt of any new complaint or request for investigation is fixed by the terms of reference at 16 December of this year, that is, 30 days from today. By 1 May 2005, the tribunal must decide what new matters on its books will be proceeding to a public hearing. After that date, no new investigation can be referred to public hearing by the tribunal.

However, there were concerns that the tribunal could discover something during its investigations which it feels must be investigated to allow it to complete its overall report. An inflexible deadline should not tie its hands in investigating something like that. All Members would agree with this. For that reason, sub-paragraph J(3) provides that, notwithstanding the dates in the terms of reference, the tribunal will also be able to investigate something that it discovers if it is necessary to enable it to make findings on the matters it is already investigating or has decided to investigate.

Sub-paragraph J(4) provides that the report or reports produced by the tribunal will be taken to be in full compliance with its terms of reference. Paragraph J(6) will enable the tribunal to exercise the discretion it sought in the fourth interim report on matters it proceeds to investigate, having regard to certain factors such as the age or state of health of people who are likely to be witnesses, how long the investigation will take, and the likely cost and relevance in terms of the overall cost vis-À-vis the complaint itself.

I intend to bring a short Bill before the Oireachtas in the next few weeks to give legal backing to the discretion being granted to the tribunal to decide which issues to investigate within its terms of reference. Given the benefit of hindsight, it appears extraordinary that the tribunal currently does not have the discretion to reject an allegation. For example, if there is an allegation that someone improperly received €250, the tribunal would nonetheless have to go through a whole panoply of investigation, which would cost perhaps tens of thousands of euro. It is improper not to give this discretion to the tribunal. These changes to the terms of reference set a firm timeframe for the work of the tribunal. The tribunal has indicated that the changes to the terms of reference will allow it to complete its work by March 2007.

In addition, the tribunal has now confirmed in writing to the Attorney General that it intends to utilise the power to sit in divisions when it is appropriate and practical to do so. This could not happen until after the hearings of the current modules. However, it is anticipated that the tribunal will begin to sit in divisions thereafter. The idea that the three judges should sit in a plenary session is not tenable. It is a practical suggestion that the tribunal should be in a position to sit in divisions.

In order to help the tribunal to meet these new more challenging timeframes, especially to allow it to sit in divisions, the Government has agreed to the allocation of an additional seven legal persons to the tribunal's legal team. Initially it will involve additional cost. It should be looked at in the context of the shorter timeframe for completion of the tribunal's work of less than three years compared to a ten-year timeframe, as indicated in the fourth interim report. The Government has decided that the new fee scale for lawyers appearing at tribunals, which was approved by the Government in July 2004, will not apply to the tribunal until 31 March 2007.

I wish to conclude by saying that I believe the changes being proposed today will allow the tribunal complete its mandate, in a more timely way, within a more certain framework. The changes will allow the tribunal reach findings and make recommendations to help ensure that the events it has investigated cannot occur again. I commend the motion to the House.