Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I move:

That Seanad Éireann:—

considering:

- the publication of a Special Report by the Office of the Ombudsman is a serious and rare occurrence and has only happened once before in the history of the Office;

- the findings of the Ombudsman relating to the design and administration of the Lost At Sea Scheme in the recently published Special Report on the scheme;

- the first and only other time a Special Report was published by the Office of Ombudsman, Government instructed the Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service to carry out an investigation into the Report and its findings;

noting:

- the Ombudsman's recommendations regarding the complainant at the centre of this case;

- the persistent refusal of Government to refer this Special Report to the Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for investigation;

- the open criticism by the Ombudsman of this refusal by Government to consider the report further and the serious ramifications this action will have on the future integrity of the Office of the Ombudsman;

- the Ombudsman's concerns that this case has highlighted the failure of the Oireachtas to hold the Executive to account;

- the worrying implications this failure has for the wider political system;

calls on Government to immediately instruct the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, to carry out a thorough investigation into the Lost at Sea Report.

I join the Acting Chairman in welcoming the Minister of State, Deputy Connick. It is not his first occasion to be here but it is his first occasion to debate across the floor from us and I wish him well in his new appointment. He has come here to respond to an important Fine Gael Private Members' motion, supported by many of our Opposition colleagues, concerning the Ombudsman's report on the lost at sea scheme and the role, function and status of the Office of the Ombudsman.

I commence my remarks by quoting a concluding comment made by the Ombudsman, Ms Emily O'Reilly, in her report of December 2009:

The Office of the Ombudsman relies on the authority which comes from its independence, impartiality and competence to gain fair play for people who have been wronged by public bodies. As Ombudsman I do not make binding decisions. The Department is free in law to reject my recommendations. My only recourse, when I consider that a public body's response to a recommendation is unsatisfactory, is to make a special report to each House of the Oireachtas under the Ombudsman Act, 1980. This is such a report.

I respectfully ask the Houses to consider my report and to take whatever action they deem appropriate in the circumstances.

This is a very significant statement from the Ombudsman. We request the Minister of State and his Government colleagues to allow the report on the lost at sea scheme to go before the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for full debate and deliberation. This matter was previously discussed in the Seanad, the other House and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. At the pertinent meeting of that committee a motion was submitted in the names of some of the Fine Gael and Labour Party Oireachtas Members requesting the committee to investigate fully the Ombudsman's report on the lost at sea scheme. However, that motion was defeated by the Government majority on the committee. The committee met again today and very significant correspondence which had been received was presented to us. This was a letter from Deputy Sargent in which he stated to the Chairman:

I write to say I would support an invitation being extended to the Ombudsman, Ms Emily O'Reilly, to attend and discuss the comprehensive Special Report prepared by her Office regarding the "Lost at Sea Scheme" with your Committee. From her public statements, I feel sure the Ombudsman would welcome such an invitation. The Office of Ombudsman rarely feels it necessary to make such statements. Accordingly, I believe that issuing an invitation to attend the Committee would reflect well on the integrity of the Office of Ombudsman and the Oireachtas. I thank you for your consideration of this matter.

This was a significant intervention from Deputy Sargent and the Green Party component of the Government. Perhaps as a result of that and of this motion being put before the Seanad, we were informed at this morning's meeting of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that an invitation was due to issue to the Ombudsman to present her case before it.

I welcome this degree of progress but in this motion we are calling for the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to carry out a thorough investigation into the report on the lost at sea scheme. Obviously, the attendance and co-operation of the Ombudsman would be integral to that investigation but if the investigation were to be deemed worthy of the word it would also require the appropriate personnel involved in the scheme at official level, at political level via the office of the former Minister, the complainant and others to come before it not simply to make statements but to take questions and engage in frank and open dialogue with us.

I want to make it very clear that in moving this motion we on this side of the House aim to be neither judge nor jury. The Ombudsman has produced a comprehensive report. As the Minister of State is aware, this is only the second time in the history of the Ombudsman's office or, to put it more dramatically, the history of the State that such a special report has been presented before the Oireachtas and Members must take note of its significance. It is not the role of Members to be the final jury or judge but to ensure the report is examined in minute detail and that the serious questions posed in the Ombudsman's report are answered fully. Moreover, the former Minister, Deputy Fahey, who has frequently claimed on radio to have been vindicated by the report, although many disagree, and who appears to stand over fully the decisions he took must have his case presented before and debated with the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Similarly, all concerned must be heard and interviewed before the joint committee and I hope progress can be made. This is the reason the wording of Fine Gael's motion is deliberate and careful. It seeks a full examination of the report and that a thorough investigation be undertaken by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

The Minister of State is aware of the tragic background to this case. In October 1981 a fishing vessel sank with the tragic loss of five lives. The history of this tragedy has been well documented and many Members have met family members of the tragic drowning victims. The Byrne family, in particular, which brought the complaint obviously was greatly affected by the loss of two family members, namely, a father and son. The remaining family members who have had a difficult time financially and in all aspects of life subsequently presented their case before the Ombudsman who submitted the report to the Oireachtas. This is a substantial matter of concern, public policy and political decision-making. It has been given a thorough, detailed and fair examination by the Ombudsman in her report. She is entitled, as she noted at the outset of her presentation, to make findings and, where she considers that such findings are not being responded to adequately by whatever is the appropriate Department, to follow up with her inquiries and make a special report. That is the reason the report is before Members.

The country has been well served by the Office of the Ombudsman since it was first created many years ago. If memory serves correctly, the first person appointed to be Ombudsman was Mr. Michael Mills. Across all Departments, many investigations have been conducted and many individual queries, concerns and worries have been addressed and, in many cases, redressed. Government policies have been changed and legislation has been amended on foot of thorough investigative work by the Ombudsman.

The report pertains to one individual scheme. As the Minister of State is aware, the complainant had grave concerns that a particular scheme was designated and almost ring-fenced to suit a small number of applicants. I do not use the word "evidence" because Members are neither judge nor jury but there certainly is a substantial body of opinion to suggest all was not well with the aforementioned scheme and the decisions taken and exclusions made. This pertains to taxpayers' money, Government decisions and families that were adversely affected. It relates to families whose way of life, income and family members literally disappeared. This is the reason Members must ensure the concerns outlined by the Ombudsman and contained in her report are not simply left on the shelves of the Oireachtas Library but are fully and thoroughly investigated. I ask my colleagues across the floor of the Chamber why anyone should fear the asking of questions or the provision of information. Why should anyone fear giving the opportunity to all those affected, on both sides of the argument, to come before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to state their cases, take questions and highlight their views, arguments and concerns?

The joint committee is the most appropriate venue in which to pursue and I hope finalise the work commenced by the Ombudsman in her report. She recommended that a particular sum of money be paid to the Byrne family but this appears to have been rejected by the Government to date. However, I hope that, on foot of what appear to be second thoughts on the part of the Green Party in particular which presumably led in a small way to the mini-U-turn of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food today, the report can be investigated in the thorough fashion it deserves. As a member of the aforementioned joint committee, I believe all of its members would be willing to examine the report in a neutral fashion without prejudging the outcome and accept this is a personal report by the Ombudsman and that others may have alternate views.

While the joint committee's members will listen to their views and presentations, they cannot afford to sweep the report under the carpet or state that, while they acknowledge the Ombudsman has made serious allegations about the workings of a particular scheme, they intend to do no more about it. For politics to be well served, the Office of the Ombudsman to be respected, the role of the Oireachtas in holding the Executive to account to be upheld and the role of Oireachtas committees to be enhanced, respected and used to the full, it requires at a minimum that the report should be placed before the aforementioned joint committee. Moreover, this should not take the form of a simple presentation by the Ombudsman but should allow for a full debate and investigation with all the affected parties concerned.

The Minister of State should listen favourably to Fine Gael's proposal which constitutes a fair and balanced approach to the report. Members are not here to condemn but to try to shed light on this tragic scenario, as well as on the political and administrative decisions taken which have caused and continue to cause such distress to so many. Moreover, the proposed amendment tabled by Government Members, if it remains the official position, does not constitute a sufficient response. The holding of a full investigation by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food should be supported by everyone who is genuinely concerned about bringing this tragic case to a conclusion.