Dan Boyle (Green Party)

According to the Order Paper, we are making statements on banking, which is an appropriately broad description given the financial sector's impact on our economy over the past 18 months. In reality, however, we are speaking about the value of a banking inquiry. Strange as it may seem in light of the contributions by certain speakers, I believe we are unanimous on the need for an inquiry. The decision to hold an inquiry having been made, we are now quibbling over the form it should take. It was never going to be a Star Chamber or the political points-scoring exercise some in the Opposition and many in the media wanted. The process has to be able to establish facts in the shortest possible period and the most cost effective manner. Two major tribunals are about to report to the Houses of the Oireachtas. One examined events in 1995 and the other began its deliberations in 1997. In light of where we stand as a country, it is important that we find a better way of answering our questions.

The proposed model has much to commend it. Many assumptions have already been made about whether the inquiry will satisfy people's demands for openness. I happen to believe it will be sufficiently open and responsive but these matters have not yet been determined. The first step in the process will be the determination by an Oireachtas committee of the terms of reference for the commission and the manner in which the committee itself will deliberate the ensuing report. That is an open process. The legislation which governs commissions of inquiry does not prohibit a commission meeting partially or overwhelmingly in public and the deliberations of the Oireachtas committee will be open and full.

This is a time-defined process. The opening stages will have to be completed by 31 May. I do not think four months will be needed, however. The commission will have to be established before 30 June and will meet for only six months. The Oireachtas committee will be able to decide how much more time will be needed once the commission has finished its work. This process can be completed within 15 months.

The process will involve establishing facts rather than identifying particular individuals or key events. Throughout this crisis, the leader of the Labour Party has masked paranoia with leadership in his obsession with the bank guarantee. I have no doubt the bank guarantee and the circumstances which led to it will be investigated. The guarantee was the correct decision, however. The prediction that the State would lose €400 million has not come true. In fact, revenue has accrued to the Exchequer even as we regularised our financial institutions.

Other political points could be scored in regard to the resources that are being invested in recapitalisation and NAMA but these decisions will also have to be investigated by the banking inquiry. At the end of the day, we must ask ourselves whether we are serious about discovering the truth at an acceptable price for the citizen and taxpayer. Many in the Opposition simply want to point fingers and score points. Questions could even be asked about the much vaunted DIRT inquiry, which did valuable work on behalf of the Oireachtas. I question what that process changed in the banking sector and who lost his or her job or faced any kind of legal sanctions as a result. Were many of the people criticised by the Oireachtas investigation the very same people who continued to be employed within the financial institutions and who made decisions that led us to the crisis we are now experiencing? I argue that what we need is a process whereby we get to the truth and the truth is acted upon because that is something we as a country have been singularly unsuccessful in doing in the past.

Many of the contributions from the Opposition are exaggerating, misleading and misrepresenting what is likely to occur over the next 15 months. Given the reportage that has accompanied the recent Government decision, I suppose this is politically fair game. However, I am confident that the process that will follow is the one that will bring us to where we need to be in terms of establishing matters of fact and learning the political and societal lessons that need to be learned from this economic catastrophe.

What has to be the result is that we do things differently and those who were individually responsible for bringing us to where we are will be removed from having any role in how we progress our financial systems and institutions and our regulatory system. If this is not to be the case, then many of the criticisms being made now will be valid. For those on the other side of the House and for many in the media to have decided now that a process is invalid, without seeing how such a process will be fully constructed and operated, is a negation of democracy in itself. If people want their circus, if they want a Star Chamber, then we will not get the truth. The facts will not be established nor will those who individually and collectively brought us to where we are be identified. If the political system is serious about establishing that truth and making things better for the people who live in this country, we need to agree on the processes. I believe the first step of this process, the scoping investigation by an Oireachtas committee, is the key element of this inquiry. How that Oireachtas committee determines how the commission operates and how the Oireachtas committee subsequently decides on the findings of fact of that commission will determine how acceptable, transparent, open and public this process is. On those grounds I ask for a degree of honesty that is singularly lacking among Opposition politicians at the moment.