Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Seanadóirí for their warm welcome. I accept the irony pointed out by Senator Crown and implied by Senator Byrne, but Senator Crown and I, as well as others, enjoyed robust debates and exchanges during the course of that referendum and I congratulated him on its democratic outcome, which I fully respect. I look forward to engaging with Senators. I respect them individually and the institution as a whole. In my role with the OPW and procurement, if I can assist the House or Senators with issues, I will be more than happy to attend the House as often as required. I look forward to that.

Senator Crown was also concerned - or, perhaps, impressed - with the speed at which I had equipped myself with knowledge of the Bill. As he knows, the Lower House has already dealt with this legislation. I was also a member of the Select Sub-Committee on Finance, which debated this Bill, so I was somewhat familiar with its provisions before my appointment today.

I thank Senator Reilly, who has left, and others for their kind comments. While I am the youngest Member of the Dáil, Senator Reilly has the honour of being the youngest Member of the Oireachtas. That is nice to see in this House as well.

It is a terrible position to be in, but I must first apologise to the House for an error in my script. My opening remarks referred to sections 54 and 55 as having been included on Committee Stage in Dáil Éireann, but that was incorrect. The correct sections are section 55, on ministerial guarantees in respect of public private partnerships, and section 56, on the use of PPS numbers by the NTMA.

I will respond to some of the issues that have been raised and look forward to a more robust and detailed exchange on them on Committee Stage, which I envisage will be later this week. Senator Michael D'Arcy stated that the ISIF should be available for areas where there is a market deficiency and should not compete with banks in sectors that are already well serviced. It is not intended that the ISIF displace areas that have adequate funding. Quite the contrary, as the ISIF will have a commercial investment mandate. As such, it can act as a catalyst to attract private sector co-investment in areas where financing is not readily available from traditional sources so that economic growth and employment might be fostered. This addresses the issues referred to by Senators on all sides of the House.

Senator Barrett queried the section that allowed the NTMA to use a unique identifier for purchasers of its retail savings products. I will outline the rationale for the House. The agency needs to be able to distinguish between its clients, not just for the normal commercial purposes, but because it needs to monitor holdings where there are tax exemptions on interest up to certain limits. There are also obligations under the EU savings directive. In the Government's opinion, it would be an unwarranted waste of public money to require the NTMA to set up a parallel system of identification where there is already a ready-made State system. This provision has been cleared by the Department of Social Protection and the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner.

Senators Byrne, Hayden and Reilly referred to social housing, a key priority for the Government that was reiterated in our recently published construction strategy and the statement of Government priorities that was published by the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste on Friday. I will focus on the Bill and the NTMA's functions in that regard. The investment sectors in which NewERA will operate are those in which it already has expertise from its shareholder executive's activities. Social housing is not one of those areas. A role in that regard may be more suitable to other areas of the NTMA family. For example, NAMA has co-operated actively with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Housing Finance Agency, HFA, in seeking to match the residential stock controlled by its debtors and receivers with the requirements for social housing. More needs to be done in that regard, and Senator Hayden has spoken on this point. Investment in social housing will fall within the remit of the ISIF so long as it is commercial in nature.

I stress that one of the aims of the changes to the NTMA governance structures proposed in the Bill is to enable it to act in a more integrated manner in the performance of its functions.

I might add, as Senator Aideen Hayden referred to it - this is important - that the NDFA already has statutory authority to enter into a PPP arrangement for the provision of social housing. Perhaps this is something we might discuss further on Committee Stage and I look forward to engaging with Members on it.

Senator Sean D. Barrett raised a number of issues, on which he proposes to table amendments on Committee Stage. I very much appreciate his explanation and look forward to dealing with the amendments.

The issue of the State Claims Agency was raised by Senators Aideen Hayden and Michael D'Arcy, among others. I will outline the rationale for the change. The State Claims Agency was set up in 2001 to manage claims for and against the State. The setting up of the agency within the NTMA meant that it was possible to recruit the specialised staff needed to work in this area because it operated outside normal public sector structures. The agency could offer market competitive salary levels to attract experienced people in mid-career from the private sector. The Bill leaves the agency virtually untouched, apart from the dissolution of the policy committee. It extends its remit to make it responsible for managing claims for costs arising from tribunals of inquiry. I note the comments of Senator Thomas Byrne on how such tribunals are not fit for purpose and that there must surely be a better way to establish facts.

Senator John Crown raised the issue of whistleblowing and wondered whether there would be protection for whistleblowers in the reorganised agency. I want to bring clarity to that issue. Section 17 replaces section 14 of the National Treasury Management Agency Act 1990 which covers the disclosure of confidential information. It updates the existing provision to take account of the new structures proposed for the NTMA and developments in the disclosure of confidential information since the NTMA was established. The existing provision is strict. It is an offence for a person to disclose information obtained in the course of carrying out duties on behalf of the agency. The new section is more nuanced and, I hope, more progressive and welcome. It will continue to be an offence to disclose, without the consent of the agency, information obtained while performing functions on its behalf. This is essential, given that staff of the agency will have access to very sensitive commercial information. However, it will not now be an offence to disclose confidential information in certain circumstances, including to the Minister for Finance or An Garda Síochána where it may relate to the commission of an offence. These qualifications means that there is now a route available for individuals who believe they should raise issues of concern outside the confines of the agency. Just as it is essential, given the pivotal role of the agency in financing the State, that sensitive commercial information be protected, clearly it is also essential that individuals be able to bring justifiable concerns to an outside authority without the risk of committing an offence. I welcome this provision in this Bill and the improvements made to it.

I am very grateful for the instructive engagement we have had on Second Stage and look forward to further engagement with Senators on Committee Stage. I thank the Acting Chairman for her good wishes and look forward to working with Members.