Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Seanad Éireann, pursuant to Standing Order 103J, shall consider the Report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges (Seanad Éireann) entitled Relevant Report on the Relevant Proposal for a Banking Inquiry under Standing Orders and the Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013, copies of which were laid before Seanad Éireann on 19 November, 2014.

I thank Senator Quinn for withdrawing the Bills that have been acted on. I urge other Members to withdraw or remove some of the items on the Order Paper. The Seanad Office does a good deal of work on the preparation of the Order Paper. I urge co-operation so that motions and Bills that are no longer relevant be withdrawn by Members.
This motion calls on the House to consider the report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on the relevant proposal of the Joint Committee of Inquiry into the Banking Crisis for the conduct of an inquiry into certain aspects of the banking crisis. I am pleased to have the opportunity to present the report to the House on behalf of the CPP.
In May this year the joint committee was asked by both Houses to develop a proposal for an inquiry under Part 2 of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013. It was asked to consider the appropriate scope and terms of reference of the inquiry, including the method of initial investigation of the inquiry subject matter; the functions and powers to be delegated to the committee to allow it to conduct the inquiry; and any other related matters the committee considered necessary.
The joint committee set out several principles to guide it in the development of its proposal. It agreed that the aims of the inquiry should be realistic and achievable. The committee took the view that the inquiry should be capable of completion within a realistic timeframe and took account of the lifetime of the current Seanad and Dáil. The committee aimed to minimise risks as far as possible and emphasised the need for the inquiry to be cost-effective. The committee took the view that the inquiry should have a clear purpose and be flexible within its focus and scope.
Under Standing Orders adopted by the Seanad in February this year, the CPP is the committee designated to receive notice of a relevant proposal from any committee that proposes to conduct a Part 2 inquiry. The CPP must cause the proposal to be evaluated and make a relevant report on it. On 26 September the Joint Committee of Inquiry into the Banking Crisis sent its relevant proposal to the CPP.
The CPP met four times between 9 October and 18 November to carry out our evaluation of the relevant proposal. In doing so we were mindful of the need to work within the parameters set out by the Act and the relevant Standing Orders. We explored our role in this regard with officials of the Houses and with legal advisers before we set to work on considering the relevant proposal in its own right.
The Chairman of the joint committee met the CPP to discuss the work the joint committee had done and to explain the principles that had informed its approach to the task. The CPP separately took expert economic advice from Professor Karl Whelan on the framework, themes, scope and timeframe of the proposed inquiry.
Having set the scene for our evaluation, the CPP then set about examining the relevant proposal in detail. Standing Order 103I lists several specific matters that the committee was required to consider. These are dealt with in more detail in our report, but I will set them out briefly for the House this morning.
The CPP was required to consider whether the proposed Part 2 inquiry should be conducted. We recommend that it should be conducted. The banking crisis is perhaps the greatest issue that the State has had to confront since its establishment almost a century ago and it has had a significant impact on the lives of the people. We believe that the people have a legitimate expectation of a comprehensive statutory examination of the causes of the crisis. A parliamentary inquiry operating within the framework of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 is best placed to deliver this.
The CPP recommends that the Joint Committee of Inquiry into the Banking Crisis should conduct the inquiry. Since the committee was established last May it has immersed itself in the subject matter of the inquiry to prepare the relevant proposal. The experience and knowledge that its members have gained would allow it to hit the ground running and help ensure that the inquiry can be completed within the life and timeframe of the current Seanad and Dáil.
The CPP had to consider the manner in which the inquiry should be carried out. We recommend that the inquiry should be carried out under section 7 of the Act and in the manner proposed by the joint committee. Section 7 allows for the recording and reporting of evidence and the making of uncontested findings of fact. It also allows for findings of fact for failure to co-operate with the inquiry. The joint committee has set out a clear statement of purpose and a conceptual framework for the inquiry comprising two phases. The context phase, involving technical briefings and public hearings, would frame the broad context of the inquiry. The nexus phase, involving an investigation process and public hearings, would identify the key questions to be addressed, identify and direct the provision of evidence, analyse evidence and culminate in a final report.
In its relevant proposal, the joint committee proposed terms of reference in which it specified 22 matters to be covered by the inquiry and 23 categories of persons to whom given matters relate. The CPP considered these in some detail. We were satisfied that they were comprehensive but recommended the addition of another important matter. This was the role that the euro and Ireland's membership thereof may have played in the banking crisis, and the related matter of the strength of sterling relative to the euro.

This recommendation has been incorporated in the proposed terms of reference resolution, which appears on today's Order Paper.

The Committee on Procedure and Privileges was also concerned to ensure that evidence related to the Central Bank and Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority, the Financial Regulator, could be taken, not only from managers and advisers but also from more junior staff. The proposed terms of reference resolution now also caters explicitly for this concern.

Members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges were conscious that the joint committee was setting itself a challenging task to be completed within a tight timeframe - by 30 November 2015. We were satisfied, however, that the proposed terms of reference are enabling rather than prescriptive and allow the joint committee to tailor the scope of its work to align it with the timeframe. The joint committee drew the attention of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to the fact that the Central Bank Act 1942 prohibits in some cases the disclosure of information by officials of the Central Bank. We have recommended that the 1942 Act be amended to ensure that no such prohibition would prevent the giving of evidence to the inquiry.

On behalf of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, I commend the members of the joint committee of inquiry into the banking crisis on the excellent work they have done in putting together their proposal for an inquiry. As Leader of the House, I also thank my colleagues on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, who represent a wide range of opinion and political perspectives, for the careful, constructive and impartial manner in which they approached the evaluation process. I hope Senators will be satisfied that the committee did its best to put in place the type of inquiry that can answer the questions that have required answering for some time. I also thank the staff and legal experts who helped the committee in its work.

By supporting the motion and subsequent motions on the terms of reference and amended orders of reference of the committee, the House can ensure the work of the inquiry can get under way by Christmas. I commend the motion to the House. I also suggest that comments on Nos. 6 and 7 be taken, if members wish, during the course of the debate on this matter.