Eugene Regan (Fine Gael)

I thank the Minister of State for outlining his position. He adopted this position when he addressed the joint committee in June, when he stated, "I am confident that a fair and objective examination by the committee of all the written and oral evidence placed before it over the past two months will show that the Department's position is both fair and reasonable." As I pointed out to him at the time, while he had suggested he welcomed the outcome of the committee's deliberations and looked forward to reading its report, he had already decided that he was not going to entertain the Ombudsman's report.

A charge has been laid against me in raising this issue. I am not making this up; I am quoting essentially from the Ombudsman's report. The Ombudsman is an independent officer in an independent office which has analysed and investigated an issue brought to her attention. She has followed fair procedures in acquiring the necessary information and coming to a considered view. I am on good ground in raising the issue of the Ombudsman's report and asking why the report should be dismissed out of hand by the Government.

Senator O'Sullivan made a political attack on the Office of the Ombudsman, which is a disgrace. It proves that there is an agenda being followed by the Government to undermine the Ombudsman because she has seen fit to point to a scheme designed by a former Minister which was flawed, unfair, unreasonable and constituted maladministration. This is what has got up the noses of members of the Government and why, as in all cases, they defend their own.

Senator Ó Brolcháin has stated this issue has been turned into a political football. It is a political issue. As the Green Party is very much involved in the Government, it cannot dissociate itself from what is happening and the way in which the Ombudsman's report has been dealt with. This is unfinished business and one cannot simply state it is a political football. Fine Gael is raising a legitimate issue - the Ombudsman in an independent report has made findings and recommendations on fair and reasonable grounds and not one iota of the facts or interpretation or the views expressed by her has been found to have been made in error by the committee. In fact, the committee endorsed her fundamental finding that the scheme had not been properly advertised, yet it failed to draw the logical conclusion to concur with the Ombudsman that it was unfair and an example of poor administration.

Recently, the Ombudsman stated:

In its published decision on the Lost at Sea Special Report the [Joint] Committee [on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food] said it accepted that the way the Lost at Sea Scheme was advertised "...was not adequate, but not to the extent that it could be considered contrary to fair and sound administration...". The Committee went on to conclude that it "...is not persuaded by the Ombudsman's views in relation to the design of the scheme." In effect, the Committee has substituted its own judgement for the Ombudsman's; its report contains no further analysis or stated rationale for the foregoing conclusions. Indeed, its entire analysis runs to a single paragraph. It appears to the Ombudsman that the Committee has taken a view based, not on an objective and critical analysis of the report, but on the basis of the party whip system. This does not constitute a rational and objective engagement on the particular case.

That is the problem with the work of the committee. It has, effectively, ignored the analysis, the debate and the findings and drawn a conclusion which is consistent with Fianna Fáil policy. At least the Minister of State has been straight about the situation. The Government was never going to accept this report but was going to support the Minister of State's colleague Deputy Fahey, come what may, as has always been done in the past. Whether it was Charlie Haughey, Bertie Ahern or Willie O'Dea, Fianna Fáil supported its own. That is where the problem arises.