Catherine Noone (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank her for her efforts with regard to the tribunal report.

I welcome the debate on and the findings of the Mahon tribunal. The last two decades of planning have shaken people's faith in politics to such a level that it will take a great deal of time to restore it. People's faith in politics and in the body politic, rather than any person, ideology or party, has been damaged hugely by the findings of the Mahon tribunal. I welcome the fact we have reached the end of the process. I am glad the findings have come to light and we can begin to act on them and rebuild faith in politics in Ireland.

One aspect of the report that alarms me, as it seems to everyone else, is its cost. This warrants debate. Efforts are being made to remedy the cost situation, even retrospectively. I have a sincere belief we can achieve the same outcomes without dedicating the same level of resources. That could have been looked at more closely. The academic, Ms Elaine Byrne has stated, rightly, that tribunals cost €500 million but raised €1 billion, if one goes back as far as the McCracken tribunal. This is true. However, it must be kept in mind that tribunals prior to the Mahon tribunal cost €200 million and raised €1 billion. The Mahon tribunal cost the people of Ireland €300 million and was a serious drain on resources. That other tribunals raised revenue is a distraction and is not entirely relevant. The Mahon tribunal was the most expensive in our history.

We need to look at a pragmatic step to curb tribunal costs in the future while maintaining the quality of their reports. Keeping terms of reference relatively narrow, which other Senators have alluded to, would be one remedy. Harsher punishments, financial or even otherwise, for those found to have misled or delayed the tribunal deliberately should be a minimum. On the conclusion of the Mahon tribunal we heard repeatedly that certain individuals had gone out of their way deliberately to obfuscate and confuse the issues. One prominent journalist wrote that at one stage they were rolling in the aisles listening to it. Sometimes the untruths were obvious and the attempts to derail the process cost both time and money. We need to work out a system of disincentives to curb such behaviour in future.

I represented a client who was called before the Mahon tribunal, although he had no good reason to be called, which was ultimately proved. This was at a cost of tens of thousands of euro, which were wasted. There were numerous examples of such waste during the lifetime of the tribunal, which is very regrettable. I read a report this morning that cuts of up to 87% have been imposed on the legal fees sought by witnesses to the planning tribunal. I welcome this, although I doubt we will be successful in achieving that level of cuts. This is one way to begin cutting costs. We need to look at how we audit these costs in future, how we decide on a cost to benefit ratio and how we punish those who deliberately run up the cost of tribunals, or any such inquiries. These costs are borne, ultimately, by the taxpayer.

I welcome the Mahon tribunal and its findings but I do not welcome the price tag that came with it. This price helped us adduce information many already had.