Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I move:

That Seanad Éireann supports the findings and recommendations of the Ombudsman's Special Report on the Lost at Sea Scheme; and calls on the Government to implement these recommendations.

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Seán Connick, whom I met at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when we discussed the Ombudsman's special report on the lost at sea scheme. The issue before us is a serious one which the House debated and on which it passed a resolution to refer it to the joint committee. I am pleased the matter was examined by the joint committee.

The Ombudsman has an important role to play in providing necessary safeguards in our system to ensure proper administration and fairness in administration by Departments and public bodies and appropriate behaviour by Ministers who are in charge of Departments. In his autobiography the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, explained the reason he did not retain the former Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Frank Fahey, in his Cabinet. He stated that Mr. Fahey had got the Government "caught up in a bit of difficulty" about the lost at sea scheme and it seemed to be "a good time to get him out of the spotlight". While I do not wish to trivialise the matter, I agree with the former Taoiseach's assessment. It is a spot of bother and an important issue that the Ombudsman found that a Department and Minister chose to design and ring-fence a non-statutory, administrative scheme to benefit a select few individuals. The Ombudsman found that this was contrary to fair and sound administration, in other words, it was maladministration. Her finding against the Minister and Department is the reason we are debating this issue. The Government has politicised the matter by supporting the former Minister in undermining the Ombudsman and her report and calling into question, on spurious grounds, the validity of her findings.

Legislation was used to benefit individuals on a number of occasions in the past. Examinership legislation was introduced by the former Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, to benefit Larry Goodman. The former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, introduced an amendment to the Finance Act in 1994 while Minister for Finance for the benefit of Ken Rohan in relation to his art collection. As Minister for Finance, the current Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, introduced the Markets in Financial Instruments and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2007, which implemented changes that benefited none other than the former Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Frank Fahey, by ensuring his pension was backdated by two years to allow him to benefit from an increase in his ministerial pension entitlements. These are examples not only of maladministration but of misuse of power.

Some of the changes such as the examinership legislation and the provisions on art in the Finance Act contained a safeguard in that they were passed and vetted by the Oireachtas and had more general application. However, the lost at sea scheme was introduced for one or two individuals in the fisheries sector. It transpires that one of the individuals for whose benefit the scheme was designed was not eligible to benefit from it. It appears, however, that the Attorney General advised that the individual in question had a legitimate expectation that he would benefit because the Minister wrote to him indicating that was the case.

We also had the finding of the Moriarty tribunal that Charlie Haughey, on becoming Taoiseach in 1987, conferred a benefit on Ben Dunne by seeking a reduction in tax from the then chairman of the Revenue Commissioners. This concerned a family trust on which the tax demand was reduced by more than €23 million to only €16 million. There is a history and pattern of Ministers using their office to benefit individuals for various reasons. It was as a result of this pattern of behaviour by former taoisigh and Ministers for Finance that Deputy Fahey believed he could do what he did with the scheme. He has been found out, however, by the Ombudsman which is highly embarrassing, not only for the former Minister but also for the Fianna Fáil Party and Fianna Fáil led Government. It is just another example of the type of unacceptable behaviour in office to which we have become accustomed and which has perhaps contributed to the difficulties in which the country finds itself.

The Ombudsman found that designing a scheme to allocate replacement tonnage for individuals who had lost a vessel at sea was desirable in principle. However, the scheme was designed and ring-fenced for the benefit of specific individuals and was never intended to have wider application. The Department opposed the introduction of the scheme because it saw the problems it could create in terms of limits on fishing as applied by the Common Fisheries Policy.

In her report, the Ombudsman states:

I had expressed the view that it was clear to me from his interview and the documentation on file that the Minister would have been anxious to ringfence the cases of the MFV Joan Patricia and the MFV Spes Nova and that of the Kreis An Avel, which was the subject of the High Court case. These cases were ultimately successful under the Scheme.

The two constituents of the then Minister benefited from more than 70% of the tonnage which was allocated. The former Minister said it was unfair and inequitable to apply the findings to the Minister and his officials. Having designed the scheme, the Minister sought to lay the blame on his Department. The Ombudsman found that in his involvement in ring-fencing and designing the scheme and directing it to be implemented, he was responsible.