Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

250. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine with regard to recent court cases, civil and criminal, where the operation and conduct of the special investigation unit has been subject to critical analysis and adverse comment and where his Department has had to settle a court case (details supplied), the steps he will take to investigate SIU with a view to making appropriate recommendations as to the future conduct of investigations; if he will release all reports carried out to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36854/14]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The media coverage of the legal settlement with Mr Fleury to-date has contained significant inaccuracies in relation to the nature of the settlement, which included a confidentiality clause binding both parties not to divulge the details of the settlement. While respecting the confidentiality clause, I want to stress that it did not provide for any compensation whatsoever to be paid to Mr Fleury. Furthermore, I can confirm that the Department’s costs in the Fleury case will be a small fraction of the exaggerated figure mentioned in the press coverage. I want to emphasise also that the investigation into the Fleury case by the Department had no bearing on the actual settlement of the case. The settlement was agreed only following an approach by Mr Fleury’s legal team seeking a comprehensive settlement to the outstanding legal issues between him and the Department.

It is also relevant to note that the Department secured a conviction in 2001 against GVM Exports Ltd, in which Mr Fleury held 50% ownership and was a Director, in respect of offences detected in the course of this investigation.

The substance of the Fleury case relates to events in 1999 at a time when Bovine Brucellosis was causing great hardship to the farming community and imposing significant costson the Exchequer. Itresulted from an investigation by the Department into the illegal movement of cattle in breach of the TB and Brucellosis eradication schemes. Following the investigation, normal legal procedures were followed involving the Office of the Chief State Solicitor and the Courts Service and resulted in Mr Fleury and GVM Exports Ltd being charged with offences relating to the illegal movement of cattle (i.e. without a pre-movement Brucellosis test) and other offences relating to animal identification.

The prosecution of the case was delayed for a considerable period of time over the years, largely due to challenges to the prosecutions initiated by Mr Fleury, some of which were the subject of Supreme Court rulings, the most recent in December 2013. While the Court ruled in substance against all of his challenges, Mr Fleury had recently mounted further legal challenges to the re-activation of the prosecution and it was in this context that Mr Fleury’s legal team sought a settlement.

With regard to the other case referred to by the Deputy, the Fannin case arose from an investigation that took place in 2009 and came before the Courts in 2013. The charges related to the alleged interference with the TB test. The investigation in this case was a joint investigation between my Department and the Gardai. Following the investigation, a file was submitted to the DPP who directed that certain charges be pursued. This case was heard before the Circuit Court. On the eighthday of the trial, the presiding Judge terminated the trial, and directed that Mr Fannin be acquitted, criticising the prosecution and the Department in particular. The key factor in concluding the trial appears to relate to confusion concerning the presentation of certain evidence,whether or not a brucellosis test had been carried out at the time of the TB test in March 2009,and the significance of this. However, this matter was not part of the Book of Evidence or the submitted prosecution case.

I initiated an internal review into how this particular case was handled within my Department. The position is that the report finds no evidence that Department staff sought in any way to mislead the court - a most serious inference carried in some commentary on the subject. A number of recommendations were made with regard to staff training, file preparation and to review current procedures of making available biological sample evidence to the defence. These recommendations are being examined currently.

With regard to inspections by officials of the Department, it should be noted that the Department deploys its general control and inspectorate staff to ensure food safety, animal health and welfare and to safeguard expenditure of public funds. These controls underpin and safeguard public confidence in Agri-food production and processing in Ireland and contribute to a very significant export market.

In some cases, the outcome of inspections leads to further investigation which may then cause charges to be brought before the Courts. The procedures adopted by the Department staff in the context of investigations which lead to charges comply with the standard requirements in regard to the taking and presentation of evidence and the rights of the person or persons being investigated.  They follow the same protocols as are used for criminal investigations carried out by the Gardai.

Separate and distinct from these cases, I recently reviewed the structure and governance around the conduct of all investigations by my Department, both internal and external. As a result of this review, I decided on the establishment of a new Investigations Division on 8th July 2014. This decision recognises the need for the Department to have in place a strong, cohesive, consolidated and effective investigation capability to ensure and protect the reputation of the expanding Agri-food industry and indeed public funds. It brings all investigation capability into one Division. The Division is headed by a Senior Superintending Veterinary Officer, supported by a team of investigators, some of whom are core members of the team and others to be drawn from areas where their expertise will be beneficial to the conduct of particular types of investigations. Such investigations will be conducted where, for example, there is evidence of suspected fraud, whether internal or external, or serious breaches of food safety or animal health and welfare laws and which are of such scale or complexity that requires the type of investigative capacity that would not be available in the course of normal inspection work.

The new Investigations Division reports to an Investigations Steering Group chaired by the Assistant Secretary General responsible for Corporate Affairs and will comprise the Chief Veterinary Officer, the Assistant Secretary General with responsibility for direct payments, and the Heads of Legal Services, Internal Audit and HR. This group will, in all new cases, determine whether matters should be referred back to line Divisions for follow through, whether an investigation is warranted and if so, whether this should be conducted by the Investigations Division or referred to the Garda Síochána. Where investigations are being conducted internally, the Steering Group will oversee the conduct of investigations and, in conjunction with the Head of the Division, determine whether submission of cases for prosecution is warranted. This new Investigations Division includes the functions previously undertaken by the Special Investigations Unit.

In conclusion, my Department seeksto promote the highest levels of legal compliance to protect the health of consumers and to promote and sustain a vibrant Agri-food industry in Ireland. This is vital to Ireland’s reputation internationally as a producer of world class products. It is also vital to support and protect an industry that employs over 170,000 people andwhich exported €10 billion worth of food and drinks products last year. In this regard, I acknowledge the dedication and commitment of the staff of my Department who carry out investigations in sometimes very challenging circumstances. These new arrangements provide for expanded and coordinated investigative capability for the Department whilst also providing for enhanced governance arrangements in respect of investigations carried out.