Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their favourable and positive commentary on the Bill, specifically Senators Clifford-Lee, Craughwell, Conway, Norris, Kieran O'Donnell, Ó Donnghaile, Boyhan and Buttimer. I acknowledge the broad support for this legislation which undoubtedly echoes the broad level of support the Bill received in the Dáil. We all agree that corruption in all areas of society needs to be tackled. The Bill introduces a range of new offences.It will be a welcome addition to the Statute Book once processed and enacted. As mentioned earlier, it will go a significant way towards meeting our obligations under various EU directives and international anti-corruption conventions. It is important that Ireland is recognised on the global stage as a safe bet for business, investment and development. As I said earlier, the Bill will be considered in Paris in June of this year by the OECD working party on bribery. I believe it will be seen as a significant improvement in our laws to date and that it will receive broad support in that forum.

While the Bill addresses both the public and private sectors, Senators will have noted a particular focus on public officials acting in the course of their duties. We must ensure that public officials who make use of their positions for their own corrupt benefit or those who facilitate corruption are adequately punished. Public officials have a unique duty to the society they serve and, as such, they should be held to account for any misdemeanours or breaches. While I believe that corrupt activity among public officials is the exception rather than the norm, we cannot be complacent and we must continue to improve our systems and laws.

A couple of points were raised during the course of the debate that I would like to mention. Senator Kieran O'Donnell called for due diligence and a review of technology and resources for the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB. I can confirm for Senators that there is to be a review of the anti-fraud and anti-corruption structures as part of the while collar crime package and the issues relating to the Criminal Assets Bureau will be examined in the course of that process, which is well under way.

On the concerns raised by Senators Craughwell and Ó Donnghaile, as mentioned previously the Criminal Justice Act 2011 provides An Garda Síochána with innovative tools for the investigation of white collar crime. Furthermore, the extended presumptions in this Bill will significantly enhance the ability of the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, to bring forward a prosecution for offences under this Bill. The upcoming criminal procedure Bill will also deal with the matter of pre-trail hearings, which will significantly reduce the length of complex trials such as those involving white collar crime and corruption. In addition, my Department is committed to conducting a wider review of the effectiveness of State bodies with a role in the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of engagement on fraud and corruption with a view to ensuring that, as stated by Senator Craughwell, our continued effectiveness in dealing with white collar crime is not in question.

Senators mentioned the matter of resourcing. As part of the white collar crime package announced last year, reform of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, is central. This will require not only restructuring but also resourcing. Senators will be aware that the reform of this office is being overseen by my colleague, Deputy Heather Humphreys, Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation.

A number of Senators mentioned the matter of the delay in bringing this Bill to the House. This Bill reforms and consolidates seven major pieces of legislation dating back to the 19th century. It gives effect to numerous requirements of international conventions, as well as the recommendation of the Mahon tribunal and other policy considerations. This is a technical area of the law. As such, time and care was needed in drafting the Bill to ensure that we have provisions that are robust and produce the intended result of criminalising corrupt practices in all sectors and to ensure the law is in a position to punish those involved.

Senators Norris and Boyhan stated that public representatives will not be subject to the offences or penalties under this Bill. That is not accurate. Under the Bill, the only penalty that does not apply to public representatives is the prohibition to seek another office in the future. I am happy to debate the detail of this measure in the context of an amendment on Committee Stage from Senator Boyhan or any other Senator. I would be concerned if we were seen to be interfering unduly with the democratic process. I want to assure Senator Boyhan and Senator Norris that, as in the case of public officials, elected officials, Seanadóirí, Members of Dáil Éireann, members of local authorities and Members of the European Parliament can be prosecuted and subject to penalties, including forfeiture of office.

The issue that the Senators are concerned about is the matter of future fitness for office. I am not sure to what extent we can disqualify people from going before the electorate but I am happy to come back to the issue on Committee Stage. In addition, section 17(4)(c) of the Bill provides that where a person is convicted of a corruption offence, the court may make an order prohibiting that person from seeking to hold public office for up to ten years. Such a penalty can be imposed where a court is satisfied that to do so is in the interests of justice and in the interests of maintaining or restoring public confidence in the public administration. However, there is no provision in the Bill for a court to prohibit anyone from seeking to be elected to Dáil Éireann, Seanad Éireann, the European Parliament or a local authority, following a conviction for a corruption offence. There were some constitutional issues raised in regard to a prohibition order that would prohibit a person seeking to be elected a Member of Dáil Éireann or Seanad Éireann. Any conviction would, of course, be a matter of public record and, as such, the voters, whether a Dáil or Seanad electorate-----