Written answers

Tuesday, 28 February 2017

Department of Finance

Tribunals of Inquiry Recommendations

Photo of Tommy BroughanTommy Broughan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

173. To ask the Minister for Finance if he will provide a full report on the actions and investigations being taken on foot of the reports of the Moriarty tribunal; the status of these investigations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10267/17]

Photo of Michael NoonanMichael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In response to the Deputy's question the Moriarty Tribunal made a number of recommendations which affected a number of Government Departments. As Minister for Finance I can only respond in relation to the recommendations made in relation to my own Department.

The tribunal pointed out problems to be addressed in our system of financial regulation.  Poor supervision, an overly-deferential attitude by regulators, poor assessment of risks and a lack of follow-through on enforcement, all played a part in the financial crisis.  I and my European counterparts have been working steadfastly since the financial crisis to bring about strengthened oversight and resolution regimes. The entire financial services landscape has changed utterly, characterised by the presence of new European institutions; strengthened regulations; a more intrusive supervisory approach; and a new focus on macroprudential requirements.

New European regulations have strengthened controls over the banking system and have resulted in an overhaul of regulation, supervision and resolution regimes. The capital requirements' regulation and directive, which came into force in 2014, brought about significant enhancements in the quality and quantity of capital that banks are required to hold and the setting of minimum liquidity requirements.

The Banking Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and the Single Resolution Mechanism have transformed the framework for dealing with failing banks and are designed to provide a financial safety net and a means for recovery and resolution with minimum disruption to the sovereign. The overarching objective of the BRRD is to shift the cost of bank failure from taxpayers to shareholders and creditors of the institutions themselves.

The Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) is now responsible for the prudential supervision framework for euro area banks. The central piece of the SSM supervisory process is the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP) under which ECB led joint supervisory teams inspect business models, internal governance, profitability and banking risks.

All of these new regulations and institutional arrangements have been designed to address the challenges of banking oversight and resolution at a European level and provide for a proactive approach towards systemic and emergent risks at a European level.

Besides the introduction of new European and national regulations, the Central Bank too has increased its resources and has become more pro-active in addressing systemic risk.

In response to the Tribunal recommendations I considered the provision of tax relief for donations to political parties and decided against introducing such relief. The Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012 provided for changes to the Electoral Act, 1997 and imposed new limits for donations. Donations to individuals exceeding €600 must be declared and donations exceeding €1,000 in any one year may not be accepted. Political party donations greater than €1,500 must be declared and donations greater than €2,500 in any one year may not be accepted. These limits, in themselves, should act to deter any attempts by wealthy individuals to influence political activity.

Recommendation: Representations to Revenue by Office holders -

In relation to this proposal, I remain of the view that this recommendation could best be considered in the context of the Government's overall approach to political and parliamentary reform. Representations are a valid part of the political process. The Government may wish to consider whether this recommendation should be confined to Revenue, or to Office holders, or whether the Commissioners decision to publish data on the volume of representations made by each Deputy is an adequate response.

The Office of the Revenue Commissioners has advised in relation to the following  recommendations of the Moriarty Tribunal that:

Recommendation: Independence of the Revenue Commissioners-

Section 101 of the Minister and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 2011 placed on a statutory basis the independence of the Revenue Commissioners in the exercise by the Commissioners of their statutory functions under the various taxation and customs enactments. This has given effect to the recommendation of the Report of the Tribunal into Payments to Politicians and Related Matters (that is, the report of Mr. Justice Moriarty), that the principle or convention of the independence of the Revenue Commissioners be placed on the more robust status of a legislative provision.

Recommendation: Transmission to other agencies of information obtained by Revenue under bilateral agreements- This recommendation has been considered. These agreements are international treaties which are very precisely drawn as to the purpose for which information may be used and would not permit such transmission. However if opportunities arise in the future, the Commissioners will consider the matter further. The Deputy will appreciate that Revenue is not in a position to comment on matters relating to individuals for reasons of taxpayer confidentiality.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.