Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement: Statements

Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation (Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor)

The people suffered severely in the last decade due to the financial collapse. That happened for a number of reasons, one of which was absolute disregard for financial governance and fair practice. I agree that the shortcomings in this case are very serious. I agree that they are unacceptable. It is infuriating for the public and we need to get to the bottom of it. This fell far short of the standard impartial, unbiased and thorough investigation we demand and expect.

With this in mind I have ordered a report from Mr. Drennan, the current director of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, into exactly what went wrong. That has to be our starting point in our attempts to understand what exactly occurred. We must know exactly what happened and exactly what failed, we must be open to any and all new measures and solutions to fix this and I do not accept that this is entirely an issue of funding and resources. So as the Minister, as a Department, as a Government, as the Dáil, we must now devise solutions, be they in areas of procedure, organisational change, enhanced powers or legislative change. If the report leads me to conclude that we need an entirely new model, then so be it. We owe it to those who suffered during the crash to never, ever allow something of this nature happen again.

I am deeply frustrated and share the disappointment and annoyance felt by Members of the Oireachtas and the public following yesterday's ruling by Judge John Aylmer. Judge Aylmer considered that, as a result of shortcomings in the investigative process undertaken by the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, he could not allow the charges go before the jury for decision. As a result, Judge Aylmer directed the jury to acquit Mr. Seán FitzPatrick of all charges against him. I share the judge's view that the shortcomings identified are serious and unacceptable. As the Minister inheriting this long drawn-out and difficult case, I intend to complete a full review and examine all possible options. Nothing is off the table.

This has been the longest running criminal case in the history of the State, at almost ten years, and has resulted in a significant legal bill to be footed by the taxpayer. As the trial is now complete, I am in a position to comment and review the results. As Members know, although I was briefed by my officials when I took office, I was totally precluded from commenting on any case before the courts. Now, and immediately on hearing the ruling, I have acted. Yesterday I formally requested the Director of Corporate Enforcement to provide me with a full and detailed report under section 955(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2014. This should address the chronology of events, the specific issues and criticisms raised by Judge Aylmer and any other relevant issues. I expect this report to be provided to me as a matter of urgency, and no later than 23 June.

The functions assigned to the director include enforcing and encouraging compliance with company law, investigating and prosecuting breaches of the Companies Acts, referring cases to the Director of Public Prosecutions for prosecution on indictment and exercising a supervisory role over the activities of liquidators and receivers. As Members know, the Director of Public Prosecutions is charged with the prosecution of criminal offences and the DPP's office operates independently of Government. Mr. Ian Drennan was appointed Director of Corporate Enforcement in August 2012 and he is statutorily independent in discharging his compliance and enforcement role. It is important to note that the criticisms directed at the ODCE by Judge Aylmer regarding the investigative procedures pre-date Mr. Drennan's appointment as director. When Mr. Drennan took office, the file relating to the case of Mr. FitzPatrick had already been forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions who took the decision to prosecute. However, when he was informed of particular difficulties in the case in May 2015, including the discovery of documents and the shredding of documents, he took immediate and appropriate action in informing the Director of Public Prosecutions of those matters.

Following his appointment, Mr. Drennan undertook a review of the organisational structure and management of the ODCE, together with the staffing and skills mix available to him. That review identified, in particular, a significant skills deficit in the area of accountancy expertise. Following that review, the director sought and was granted sanction to recruit seven new forensic accountants. Five accountants have now been recruited and the process of recruiting a further two is in progress. Additionally, the director sought and received sanction to recruit a digital forensics specialist. This specialist is due to start work next month. The ODCE also has an approved complement of seven members of An Garda Síochána. Vacancies exist for two of the Garda posts following retirements. The secondment of gardaí to the office is a matter for the Garda authorities and the director has been in communication with them to expedite these vacancies. The ODCE has recently been advised that one of the vacancies is to be filled shortly.

I now want to comment briefly on the trial. Under the proceedings initiated by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr. Seán FitzPatrick, the former chairman and chief executive of Anglo Irish Bank Corporation plc, was charged with 21 alleged breaches of section 197 and six alleged breaches of section 242 of the Companies Act 1990. The trial in respect of Mr. FitzPatrick began on 13 April 2015. A jury was sworn in, before whom Mr. FitzPatrick was arraigned on alleged breaches as outlined earlier. I understand that substantial legal arguments, which included the issues regarding witness statements and shredding of documents, took place in the absence of the jury. The trial judge delivered a ruling on the range of issues on 2 June 2015. She discharged the jury and directed that a new trial be held in October 2015. Subsequently, in August 2015, the High Court ordered that the trial date be deferred to 25 May 2016. Mr. FitzPatrick's retrial in connection with those charges began before Judge Aylmer and a jury in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on 21 September 2016. At that time, it was envisaged that the trial would be likely to conclude by the end of 2016. However, the bulk of the court's time between September and December was taken up with legal arguments which were required to be dealt with in the absence of the jury, and in respect of which no reporting was permissible for that period.

I understand that many of the arguments again related to issues now in the public domain. The trial continued and legal argument in the absence of the jury meant that the hearing of evidence began in December 2016. On Wednesday 24 May, Judge Aylmer directed the jury to acquit Mr. FitzPatrick of all charges. It is clear from Judge Aylmer's comments that there were serious and unacceptable deficiencies in the investigative practices used by the ODCE in this case. In particular, the manner in which two witness statements were obtained and the shredding of documents were cited. The judge’s comments were highly critical and highlight a number of areas of concern. I note that the ODCE has accepted the criticism directed at it by Judge Aylmer and outlined some of the actions it had already taken long before the ruling which addressed these criticisms. These steps included the appointment of new professional experts and an assurance that investigative procedures now in place will prevent such a case arising again. This assurance can be provided because members of the Garda Síochána will now take the lead on all criminal investigations.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is it agreed that the Minister will have an additional minute to conclude her contribution? Agreed.

Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor

As I outlined earlier, I have written to the Director of Corporate Enforcement to request a detailed report into the issues highlighted by the judge. I expect this report to be finalised as a matter of urgency. With the support of the Office of the Attorney General, I will review this report very carefully. This is my number one priority and I take it most seriously. I reiterate that all possible options are on the table and I will take all actions necessary to ensure that lessons are learned. I assure the House that I will return at the earliest opportunity to update Members on this matter and the actions I deem necessary.

Deputy Niall Collins

I will be sharing time with Deputies Troy and Butler.

Every week, probably even today, repossession courts are sitting across Ireland to hear cases brought by banks and organisations such as vulture funds who have bought loan books. As a result, people are being thrown out of their houses. I have attended such hearings, as have many other Members in their role as constituency representatives, to observe and support people in the process. It is always a case of a big bank or business against a small person. This trial turned that concept on its head. It was a case of the State taking on a big person. In one respect, it was intended to give the perception that no one, no matter how big they are, can get away with breaking the law. If a small man is prosecuted, the prosecution is inevitably successful. The collapse of this trial is so shocking on many levels that people are disgusted that the State has shown a lack of capacity in terms of how to bring a successful prosecution. The comments of the presiding judge in regard to statement contamination, witness coaching, the shredding of documents, and the presumption of guilt rather than innocence have been widely reported in recent days. These are fundamental issues in bringing criminal prosecutions. However, this case was approached in a botched manner. This serious and grave issue needs to be sorted out and there needs to be a proper follow-through, which is the most important issue.

The State's approach to prosecuting white collar crime needs to be considered. Prosecutions can involve many organisations, such as the Garda Síochána, the Criminal Assets Bureau, the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the Revenue Commissioners, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Health and Safety Authority and, potentially, the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Local Government Audit Service. These are some of the many agencies charged with trying to bring white collar crime to heel. There is a scattergun approach to doing so, with no co-ordination or focus. The result is evidenced by the FitzPatrick trial and the fallout therefrom. A proper debate on co-ordinating the State's approach to tackling white collar crime is needed. If it is necessary to bring in a serious fraud squad or serious crime agency similar to those that exist in the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions, then the State should take that step.

We must be mindful of the damage done to Ireland's reputation by this trial. Ireland's reputation was discussed in the context of a debate in the House regarding the Apple tax judgment. Many commentators from outside of Ireland referred to it as the wild west in terms of playing fast and loose on tax policy. For outsiders to see the collapse of a trial of such importance in the context of the calamity of the banking crisis and Anglo Irish Bank in particular is hugely disturbing. When one adds what has happened in this trial to the perception that the Garda Síochána have created for itself as a result of financial irregularities at the Garda College in Templemore, the credibility of the Garda is in tatters. I say that with much regret. That issue has been debated in the House on many occasions. The credibility of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is also now in tatters. We have to pull together to mend this damage.

Serious questions need to be asked of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. It is an independent office, as are many of the agencies of the State. Unfortunately, its independence shrouds a lack of accountability in terms of the organisation's output. Why was this case once again sent for trial following the collapse of the first trial in view of the many misgivings such as critical documents having been shredded? More details in this regard will emerge in the coming weeks. More accountability is needed, as is more questioning of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The total cost of this saga needs to be revealed when the Minister has that information. We know the cost of it to ordinary people who are struggling to keep their homes or on whom banks are foreclosing. Those people are carrying the cost. The State is now being asked to pick up the cost of this trial on the double, in particular through the free legal aid scheme. It is of huge concern that the criminal side of the free legal aid budget is being drained, which is impacting on the provision of civil free legal aid. An ordinary person such as a woman who has been battered by her husband or is estranged or is trying to recover a maintenance payment and needs to avail of free legal aid for that civil matter cannot be helped because the free legal aid budget is being drained by cases such as the FitzPatrick prosecution. The expansion of the terms of reference of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland to allow it to examine the functioning of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement needs to be considered.

The issue of resources needs to be addressed. During Fine Gael's time in this Government and the previous, staff numbers in the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement fell from 43 in 2010 to 35 in 2016. The Minister has alluded to a recent increase in its staffing level.

Clear legislation is needed for accountancy bodies in terms of conflicts of interest. The same lawyers were advising Ernst & Young on several cases, including the FitzPatrick trial, a case taken against Ernst & Young by the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation, IBRC, and in terms of Ernst & Young's own regulatory environment. The area of conflicts of interest of professional organisations and the belief that Chinese walls exist or are good enough need to be further fleshed out.

I trained as an accountant in Ernst &Young in Limerick when I left college over 20 years ago. I am putting it on the record that I had no involvement in auditing any financial institutions. We dealt with small businesses and manufacturing. Separation and conflicts of interest should be key issues, and Ernst &Young have questions to answer here.

Deputy Mary Butler

The collapse of the longest running criminal trial in history, involving charges against the former chairman of Anglo Irish Bank, represents a damning indictment of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. Today, as chair of the Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, I have written to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement asking that he appear before the committee to address his functioning in light of the collapse of the trial of Mr. FitzPatrick. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, admitted this week to very serious failures in its investigation into the actions of Mr. FitzPatrick. We need to hear before committee as a matter of urgency an account of the events that led to the collapse of the case, and to brief us on the ODCE's operation in light of the case. The judge condemned the ODCE's investigation for its inappropriately biased and partisan approach. My colleague, Deputy Collins, spoke about following through. The follow through will be started in committee.

Deputy Robert Troy

Everyone looking on is totally and utterly outraged. There is a perception that there is one law for the elite and another for the hard working citizens. We can be sure that Mr. Seán FitzPatrick will not be presenting himself to a community welfare officer in the weeks or days ahead. The consequences of his actions over many years have left many families presenting themselves on a regular basis to a community welfare officer. Today I spent 20 minutes arguing with a financial institution on behalf of a hard-pressed family to seek an element of leeway. They are trying so hard to meet their financial obligations and the bank is not playing ball with them.

The Minister has said that she will seek a report, which I welcome. It is acknowledged that this office is coming before the committee. That is welcome. However, too often in this House Members are reacting to what is the political flavour of the day and what is in the news. What the Minister needs to do today is set a clear timeline as to when we will ensure that actions are being taken and that there will be consequences for the people in this office who failed the State so abysmally.

Deputy Maurice Quinlivan

I am sharing time with Deputy Pearse Doherty.

I welcome this opportunity to speak on the role of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and on the shambles of the court case that has just concluded. In relation to the Seán FitzPatrick case, it is clear that the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement categorically failed in its mission to encourage adherence to company law and bring to account those who disregard that law. The sheer incompetence shown in this investigation is shocking and totally unacceptable in this day and age. Common sense informs us that it is not appropriate for anyone to take statements from witnesses except an Garda, or to shred documents in the midst of a criminal trial.

The financial cost of this fiasco will be significant. Leaving aside the price of a nine year investigation, this 127 day failed trial is estimated to have cost €3 million alone. As usual the taxpayer is left cleaning up the mess and picking up the tab. If one thing is guaranteed in this State it is that the taxpayer will be left on the hook.

The loss to the citizens of Ireland is not just financial. This situation also led to an immeasurable loss of public confidence in politics and the legal system. The State can be bankrupted and banks can collapse and no one is held to account. However, if one does not pay the TV licence one can expect the full rigour of the law to be applied. Public opinion is firmly of the belief that criminal law is applied differently depending on who one is and what his or her worth is. This has to change. People across the country are rightly outraged at the conduct of the recent court case. The shambolic way in which the ODCE has dealt with white collar crime contrasts starkly with so-called welfare fraud. Public taxpayers’ money is currently funding an advertising campaign which follows the usual hard right agenda in its attempt to stigmatise those unfortunately dependent on welfare and not simply the tiny minority who commit fraud.

I look forward to the Government’s similar campaign to tackle white collar crime. Minister Varadkar has defended his recent campaign saying social welfare fraud was a crime which should be punishable. I agree with that, but where is the Government’s campaign against white collar crime? A crime that cost us billions of euro brought this county to the brink of ruin and into years of devastating austerity which has fractured families and whole communities across the State. Everyone agrees that the agency established to investigate corporate crime is clearly not fit for purpose. Surely the Government is to blame for that. The ODCE is under-funded, under-resourced and not given the opportunity to be effective. One has to wonder why this is the case. The chief investigator in the case of the former chairman of Anglo Irish Bank unbelievably had no previous experience and he admitted in evidence that he made many fundamental errors, including the destruction of documents. This occurred in what was anticipated to be one of the most important cases in decades in this country. Given his lack of experience, who appointed him as chief investigator? Who was he accountable to?

In 2005, 2006, and 2007 Fianna Fáil refused requests from the office to increase its workforce by 20 people. The office described its resources as wholly inadequate. The then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, dismissed their requests. Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour have all been in government since this investigation began in 2008, so it is hypocritical of Deputies from these parties to stand here and say more should have been done to avoid this outcome. They had the opportunity in government to tackle white collar crime but they failed to address it and this is the result of their inaction.

My party colleague, Teachta Adams, yesterday reminded the Dáil that the Government spends just over €5 million on the Office of Director of Corporate Enforcement. That is €5 million to investigate white collar crime. It is clear the ODCE was unprepared, under-resourced, without the necessary skill and unable and not fit for purpose for the type of investigation and prosecution it needed to undertake. The Minister said before the Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation on 21 June last year that she was of the opinion that the ODCE was sufficiently funded. Clearly this is not the case. In light of the serious shortcomings this investigation and court case have highlighted, does the Minister stand by the statement she made? As the ODCE comes under her remit, does she personally take responsibility for this shambles?

Deputy Pearse Doherty

Ireland does not do prosecution of white collar crime. It is not just the collapse of the trial and the acquittal of Seán FitzPatrick, but for decades now we have seen that thread. We have seen the underfunding of resources of agencies that are supposed to be tackling white collar crime. We see staff resources being cut, and we see no legislative framework that should underpin a strong, robust, anti-corruption, anti-white collar crime agenda.

My colleague spoke about the request the OCDE made. It was established in 2001 as a result of the tribunals of investigation and the massive corruption that we saw in those tribunals. They spanned three decades yet there was only one conviction for corruption. This is despite the fact that we know that politicians were up to their necks with brown envelopes and despite the fact that we know that people had benefitted in terms of their own lifestyle as a result of backhanders given to people in influential places. The Criminal Assets Bureau did not go in and seize the assets at that time because there is one rule for certain individuals and another rule for others.

When the ODCE was established in 2001 within a number of years the director was requesting resources. The director wrote to Michéal Martin, who was the line Minister at that time in 2005, and continued to write to him over a period of time to tell him that the ODCE was wholly inadequately resourced. Deputy Martin was the then Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, and he refused the request. At a time when tens of thousands of additional public sector workers were being recruited not one additional staff member was given to the ODCE. Bertie Ahern stood where the Minister is sitting today and said the ODCE needed to wait its turn. At the same time Seán FitzPatrick and his ilk were setting in train the economic disaster that people the length and breadth of this country had to endure over the last ten years.

It is a symbol of how this country deals with white collar crime. The Fianna Fáil Deputies now tell us that Seánie FitzPatrick should be behind bars and that he caused an absolute catastrophe. A number of years ago, that party was appointing the same Seánie FitzPatrick to the boards of State bodies. The Fianna Fáil leader of the day was out playing golf with him and taking advice from him on economics, sipping wine and sharing dinner. I am really annoyed today because all we are going to do is go through the motions. We have fake outrage about white collar crime from Fianna Fáil, a party that refused to beef up this agency at a time when such action was needed. We have the fake outrage of the Minister, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, even though the ODCE has dropped 25% of its staff since Fine Gael came into power in 2011.

This is not the first time the Minister has heard about the shredding of documents and vital information, or if it is, by God, there is something really wrong. We in Leinster House, along with everybody who is clued in, knew about that for quite a while. Was there not a report required at that time? There was no need to wait until the trial collapsed. There was no need to wait to beef up the resources of the ODCE or to have a review of every single agency. That is what happens in modern democracies. That is what happens when people in suits take our economy and ruin our country. The Government should have looked to see what agencies we have. It should have done a review to see if they were fit for purpose and it should have strengthened them and beefed up our legislation. That is not what happened. The Minister says her Government presented the seven additional forensic accountants to the ODCE. Even though that staffing request was made in 2013, they were not appointed until 2015, two years later. The trial was ongoing at that time. We only had one person who could actually forensically analyse data on a computer. It is absolutely mind-boggling. It is like something out of Monty Python. This is how the State deals with white collar crime.

Year after year, I have been challenging both the responsible Minister and the Taoiseach to conduct a complete review of white collar crime agencies in the State. I requested a commission that would examine all our agencies to make sure they were robust enough and, crucially, to overhaul our legislation to make sure we are not only going after the minutiae. These bankers, these people who wrecked our country, should rightly be behind bars. Since we have not made it illegal to do what they have done, they are walking the streets of Dublin and elsewhere with smiles on their faces, able to get on with their lives. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of people who were forced to emigrate or are in poverty or have lost their houses are suffering because of this misery. This cannot be allowed to happen time and again.

It is not just me making these points. A senior barrister addressing the Bar Council said that a tin-pot dictator would blush at the type of system we have. In 2012, Mr. Justice Kelly said of the Anglo Irish Bank trial that he was astonished to find there were only 11 gardaí and eight members of the ODCE working on it, the biggest trial in the history of the State. All the warning signs were there. While there can be no forgiveness or excuse for what happened in the ODCE, it is simply wrong to hang that office out to dry. The present Government and Fianna Fáil before it underfunded and under-resourced the fight against white collar crime because some of their own people were up to their necks in it.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

I am sharing time with my colleague, Deputy Burton. I will take seven minutes if that is acceptable to the House.

Anyone charged with investigating serious crime has two basic obligations. The first is to assemble all the information needed to persuade a jury that the accused person has committed a crime. The second is to maintain the integrity of that information and of the information-gathering process itself. To acquire full information fairly and to preserve it is not hugely demanding. We know very well that An Garda Síochána eventually learned hard lessons after a long succession of cases in which prosecutions were thrown out because the evidence could not be relied upon. We now discover that another major body charged with the investigation of serious crime seems to have learned nothing about the basic obligation to comply with the law of the Constitution.

We all know that the defendant in a criminal case has rights. It is also important to remember that serious crimes are prosecuted in the name of the people and they, too, have rights. Mr. FitzPatrick has not been convicted of any offence and is entitled to the benefit of his directed acquittal. However, that does not prevent me and most right-thinking people from continuing to believe that company laws were breached in an egregious manner in the management of Anglo Irish Bank. That was the case made on the people's behalf and we expected Mr. FitzPatrick and others to be required to answer it.

Those whose duty it is to prosecute cases on the people's behalf owe a duty to the people to discharge that function professionally and competently. This train wreck of a case seems to reveal staggering incompetence in how agencies of the State do the people's business. We as public representatives are not just entitled but obliged to find out why this happened. I have heard Professor Niamh Brennan, a distinguished author and academic with a lot of expertise in this area, caution that we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater. That is fair enough. I am sure the ODCE has done good work over the years. In this particular case, however, the failures have been monumental. I am concerned that there might be wider implications. Our regulatory landscape has many bodies independent of Departments with powers to prosecute summary offences in their own name and to prepare serious prosecutions for the Director of Public Prosecutions. After this omnishambles, I fear there is a risk that other bodies could repeat those mistakes. I believe the review that must now inevitably follow must include an audit of the competence and capacities of all regulatory agencies that are capable of mounting investigations and prosecutions in criminal law.

I repeat my earlier statement that I respect Mr. FitzPatrick's directed acquittal. However, I do not believe that outcome should prevent a full examination as to how and why this happened. The Minister proposes a referral under section 955(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2014. Although that may be a reasonable starting point, it is far from meeting the requirements of this matter in full. In essence, the Minister proposes to ask the director to give an account of his own stewardship, to give his own story. What is really required here is a robust external review of what happened and how it happened.

I have listened to Deputies talk about resources. Although some people want to make political capital out of that issue, the issue of the million breath tests was not a resources problem. Evidence is not shredded because of resources issues. We must demand and expect high standards from those whom we pay well to do the people's business. We need an independent investigation into the workings of the ODCE, a process that has already been called for by my colleague, Deputy Alan Kelly. Once the investigators have completed a review of that body, they should be tasked with repeating the exercise for any other body that has been charged with the enforcement of criminal law. That would include the HSE, the Health and Safety Authority, ComReg, the Central Bank and others.

I hope the Minister will now propose a meaningful engagement with all of us in opposition on these matters. We must have robust mechanisms to carry out investigations into matters that have rocked the foundations of the State. Others have spoken about the economic catastrophe that the people have endured in recent years. The people have marched through that horror story and have asked that things be put right in order that we can have an economic future.

Equally, they have asked for an accounting in order that those in the banking system who, through their actions or inaction, caused the economic catastrophe that befell our people - as well as those who were tasked with oversight and who failed in that - will be held to account. Bluntly, when it comes to the holding to account of those who were responsible for the economic catastrophe, we have a long way to go.

Deputy Joan Burton

This is a low blow to citizens in the country, especially to people who lost their jobs, businesses or homes as a consequence of the goings on in Anglo Irish Bank. It is fair to say that white-collar crime is not taken seriously in this country. I believe the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation has never really wanted the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. It has always been something of a holding job rather than a thorough job. Consideration now has to be given, as it was at the time of the murder of Veronica Guerin, to the establishment of a criminal assets bureau for white-collar crime. Nothing less will address the situation. It must be seriously resourced, robust in its attitude and willing to take on all comers in respect of white-collar crime. That is the only way it can address the devastation, loss and cost that such crime means for the rest of society.

The basic difference or distinction between gathering evidence for a civil case and gathering evidence for a criminal case appears to be at the heart of what went wrong in this regard, in addition to the shredding of documents. The Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation is part of the permanent Civil Service. Ministers do not have day-to-day contact with officials in a quasi-independent autonomous section of the Department. Did no one in the Department shout stop? My colleague, Deputy Howlin, brought in whistleblowers legislation, which has changed all of that. Where are the people in the Department who have come forward and advised the Minister? I believe that all those involved in this shambles need to seriously consider their positions.

By whom will this report be carried out? The Minister should not tell me that it will be by one of the officials in the Department. I do not believe that would be acceptable to anyone in the Dáil. I hope the Minister tells me it will be done by someone who is competent and who has the relevant expertise, maturity and experience. The people who have handled this from the Department's side appear to have been people who probably were very good but whose experience all related to civil litigation and who seemed to have little or no experience with criminal prosecution. The cost of this to Irish society is severe.

I listened to Deputy Pearse Doherty. I recall that Deputy Doherty was one of the people who voted for the bank guarantee. He was proud to do that and he told us what a good fix it was for the people. People are gutted by what has happened with regard to this trial. It would seem now that the legal insiders were aware, by and large, that a second trial would have had little chance of success.

I have seen the advertisements against social welfare fraud put on the buses by my successor in the Department of Social Protection. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation is listed as one of his supporters in the current discussions within her party. Will the Minister please tell the Minister for Social Protection to save half of the €250,000 that he has put into that campaign and divert it to white-collar crime? Were he to do that, he might actually do the public in Ireland some service.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Coppinger is next. Are you sharing time, Deputy?

Deputy Ruth Coppinger

I am sharing time with Deputy Boyd Barrett.

The expression "fake outrage" has been mentioned. Fianna Fáil Deputies certainly must have to go to acting classes because trying to generate an emotion around these issues must be extremely difficult for them. The same applies to those in the Labour Party who were in government with Fine Gael for years while this lack of pursuance took place.

I would love to say that the acquittal of Seán FitzPatrick has been greeted by working-class people and ordinary people with collective outrage. Actually, it has been greeted with a collective lack of surprise because there is little or no faith in the Minister or any of the majority parties in this Dáil, to deal with this.

It is quite clear of late that there are elements of a banana republic around this State when we consider the crises with the Garda, the church and so on. There is probably an element of disappointment on behalf of the Minister and some in the establishment in Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and so on. There is an argument that they needed to jail at least one significant person in connection with the bailout. Lo and behold, one of those significant people has gone.

This investigation was foiled due to the historical subservience of the establishment to big business and the lack of concern about white-collar crime in general. It simply confirms the view of many people that there is one law for white-collar crime and another for blue-collar crime; one law for the rich and another for the poor. Indeed, there is no law for the rich – let us be frank.

It would appear that the only things senior bankers got sentences for were life sentences of fat juicy pensions. Can the Minister point to how many people have been prosecuted in connection with the bank bailout? I think the number could be counted on one hand – it is minuscule. However, the downfall of the banks was caused by the cutthroat profit motive that exists in the banking sector. The previous Government and the Government before that operated light-touch regulation in the sector. They were quite happy to see vast profits being made by the banks with minimal regulation. This led to extraordinary mortgages – of up to 40 years in some cases – being heaped on the back of ordinary people. This was well documented by my colleague, Joe Higgins, in his minority report at the banking inquiry.

The Minister says she is serious about white-collar crime. All these developers have now had their act cleaned up in NAMA. Either they are back on their feet or they are getting back on their feet. Some are even getting State hand-outs. I am not referring to the land that the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, is talking about gifting. I am referring to Activate Capital, which is getting money from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, and some of the big developers who were involved in the crash. Not a word has been said about them. It is all perfectly legal and there is nothing illegal about it. Never before have so few people paid for such serious crimes. Let us consider the toll taken on health, education and special needs services. Only this morning the Tánaiste invoked the excuse that we had no money for years and that was why we have a housing crisis now. The State had money but it was put into the banks. The amount was €64 billion in total.

The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is a convenient scapegoat. Obviously, what happened should be investigated and any incompetence should be dealt with but the office is completely under-resourced. Is the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation for real? Fifty people were investigating the biggest crime that took place in this country in a decade of austerity. The staff in place were completely inexperienced when it came to dealing with criminal investigations. The lead investigator was never involved in a criminal investigation. Gardaí were not in place to take statements from witnesses. Of course, errors were made in the context of under-resourcing, staff numbers etc.

At the same time, however, many Garda resources were put into fighting people over the water charges. A total of 200 people were arrested at the time. Vast resources went in to challenging the people who were challenging austerity. On the same day that Seánie FitzPatrick was being led out into the lovely sunshine, ordinary people from Tallaght – I will not comment on the case, of course, because it is sub judice - who were involved in a protest over the very austerity that was resulting from this white collar crime were facing court. I will not comment on the details but already one 16 year old has been criminalised for that, in stark contrast to what has happened to Seán FitzPatrick. That is not lost on people. It is certainly not lost on the people who voted for the Labour Party, Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The fact that Seánie FitzPatrick, with his rotten and corrupt practices at Anglo Irish Bank, is walking away free is not a blunder; it is a set-up. This stinks to high heaven. There is a direct line----

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I will give a general warning about trials. We should refrain lest there might be consequences.

Deputy Ruth Coppinger

I wish to make it clear that I did not comment on the case. I know Deputy Burton passed by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I made no comment on it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

No. She asked me to put down her name.

Deputy Ruth Coppinger

I will comment plenty-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I believe the fact that Seánie FitzPatrick is walking away is not a blunder but a set-up that stinks to high heaven. There is a direct line between Seánie FitzPatrick's rotten, corrupt activities at Anglo Irish Bank and the families that are this week being sent to Garda stations or are sleeping in parks because no homes are available. The establishment in this country has contrived and conspired to ensure that he walks away free. It is an absolute scandal.

Consider the facts. An individual with no previous experience in criminal prosecutions is put in charge of the case. He has never even taken statements from witnesses in a criminal trial. In 2012, a judge presiding over the High Court's commercial list wonders why only 12 gardaí have been assigned to the case. However, nothing is done. Some gardaí are even moved to other cases. In March 2011, the Minister with responsibility for trade is told in a report that there are irregularities in the way the investigation is being carried out. In December 2010, a preliminary report was shown to the DPP making the DPP aware of the manner in which the statements were being taken, which was irregular. Mr. O'Connell told the court that the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement changed its practice since he gave evidence in 2015. Therefore, it knew, yet we only find this out now. To me, all of it stinks. Ministers, gardaí, judges and the DPP knew there were problems, but nothing was done and he walks away free because of the apparent blunders of one scapegoated individual. I do not believe it for a minute. It is rotten and absolutely stinks to high heaven.

As Deputy Coppinger said, the ordinary people on the street have been shafted by Mr. FitzPatrick and Anglo Irish Bank and the disaster inflicted on the country rolls on. The property assets that these people bankrolled with gambling and speculation were handed over to NAMA and then handed back to vulture funds and to some of the same developers who are now evicting people, resulting in a homelessness catastrophe. One of the chief architects of this walks away and we are told it is because of a mess up in the investigation. I do not believe it is primarily to do with resources in the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, although that is part of it. That is part of the ongoing fact that there is one law for the rich and one law for the poor in this country. This situation is perpetuated and protected by Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and the establishment in this country. However, I think it is worse than that. I believe that many people in government and in the State knew that this was going to collapse and they let it collapse. They let it run to this point so that Mr. FitzPatrick would get off. The people have been shafted yet again. The economy and people's livelihoods were destroyed and we have a housing crisis that rolls directly on from it, yet one of the chief architects walks away. How convenient. If anyone believes that this is a blunder, a mistake, a resource issue or the result of one individual not being able to cope with the stress, he or she must be living in fantasy land.

I do not believe the Government's fake tears. It must have known it. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation was not present but her Department must have known because we have been told that there was a report stating there were problems in how the evidence was gathered. It stinks to high heaven.

Deputy Thomas Pringle

If committing a crime in Ireland, wear a suit. The chances of being caught are probably directly proportionate to the price of the suit worn. Given media reports, the only source of information available to the House until today, which says a lot in itself, it is beyond credible that the Government could be surprised at the collapse of the case. It appears that journalists covering the case, who were restricted in their reporting, were fully aware that the case would be dismissed. For the Government to state now that it wants a report on this from the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is far too little far too late.

I raised the question of white collar crime during Leaders' Questions last week and highlighted that the staffing levels at the ODCE had fallen by more than 18% since 2010 and that the number of gardaí working in the office has been reduced by 24.5%. At one point, there was only one garda seconded to the ODCE, while 20 gardaí are working in the Department of Social Protection. This shows where the priority lies in detecting crime and who Fine Gael sees as being the criminals. However, it is not only Fine Gael who do not see crooks in suits as a problem. Fianna Fáil told the ODCE, when it highlighted it was under-resourced, to get in line in 2007. In 2015, when the first case collapsed, Deputy Howlin was the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and sat at the Cabinet table. What did they do then?

It is estimated that Ireland loses about €2.5 billion a year from economic crime. That is €25 billion over the past ten years. However, that is okay because they are the people who buy tables at party fund-raisers. Today the Minister announced that this will be investigated and lessons learned. We already know what is wrong. It has been pointed out by the ODCE itself and by the Garda Inspectorate. The question is one of resources. However, we also now have to ask what was known all along about this case. The chronology of some of the events has been outlined by Deputy Boyd Barrett. The Minister outlined in her response the steps that have been taken by the ODCE. I wonder when these steps started? Was it after June 2015 when the first case collapsed? Why was the second case taken? Why was there a second prosecution? The same evidence was to be used and presented, yet the Government and the DPP, knowing it would collapse, allowed a second prosecution to go ahead.

In 2015, the Garda Inspectorate report noted that the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation was struggling to manage the volume of suspicious financial transactions forwarded as part of money laundering and terrorism financing legislation. The report also found that the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation is investigating serious fraud without always having the skills and resources to conduct a thorough investigation. This shows the Government's priorities. It will go after and hound those in receipt of social welfare. Fraud does take place there but these people have nothing and will have nothing at the end of it. The people the Government is letting go and not targeting, however, are those who will walk away wealthy, with big pensions and with their names and freedom intact.

Other parties in the House are saying that we need an anti-corruption agency. In his leadership pitch, the Minister, Deputy Simon Coveney, is saying that he will establish one. However, do we really need another agency or board and an inordinate delay in its establishment that allows politicians to say that they are dealing with the issue? We do not. We need the Government to act and to do what it knows needs to be done. We already have the agencies; we have just never taken them seriously. We have never made them work on behalf of the citizens of the country. The potential savings for our society are huge at more than €2.5 billion a year, against which the amount of social welfare fraud that takes place in the State pales into insignificance.

The most important question is when the Government will show our citizens that the criminal law is not only a law for the poor and the defenceless. When will it begin to address the scandal and start targeting those crooks in suits?

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I too am delighted to be able to speak today although it saddens me to have to speak. The former director of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, Mr. Paul Appleby, has declined to comment on whether he will co-operate with the report and audit into the agency's role in the trial of Seán FitzPatrick. Let us think about that. Mr. Appleby has received retirement benefits worth almost €590,000 since he retired five years. Controversially, he retired early on an annual pension of €73,000 on top of a €225,000 lump sum, most of it tax free.

I thank the judge and the jury in the case for staying so long. I thank the judge and all juries that give their valuable time. I thank the judge because if the trial ended long ago, we would not know any of this. This particular judge has done a great service to the State. People are criticising him for going on so long with it but he has done a powerful service to the State. There was a media blackout for an awful lot of it. We would not know anything about it. I thank him from the House on behalf of the people of Tipperary.

The Minister said people have suffered. There are shortcomings in the report. If the Minister's meagre answer is that it fell short, it is pathetic. What went wrong? It is all very wrong. It was wrong from the start. Mr. Appleby was in the Competition Authority where he took on cases. The solicitor was involved with CRH. There is a long history here of abject failures to act and control big business when CRH was crushing small people in my county. They were good, honest, family business people who gave huge employment as their people did before them. CRH wanted a monopoly. Writing to the Competition Authority was like writing to Santa Claus. At least one gets something from Santa Claus. One got sweet Fanny Adams - excuse the expression - from the Competition Authority or any of those authorities. It is all a racket. They all get bought into it. They are all self-serving and they serve the big business. To hell with the ordinary people. They came from the Competition Authority and were appointed across to this so-called agency. It is another quango that has done nothing for the people. It has done nothing to explain the cost. We are going to give a fat pension to the head of it for five years. Then we have a solicitor who was with the Competition Authority and the DPP for years and now he is the main man who drafted all the statements incorrectly and took the statements incorrectly. I wonder how many people were charged under this solicitor's watch in the DPP's office in the past. If he is so incompetent to make such a monumental cock-up, what about the people who were prosecuted? I happen to know of somebody the ODCE prosecuted. He was a developer in Dublin who had an apartment block. He was brought before the courts, severely treated and fined €10,000 for not holding management meetings. It is a case of who and what people are, as Deputy Pringle said. It is a case of who people are and who they know. This is outrageous. It stinks from the high heaven. There has been no appetite since I came in here in this or the previous Government to tackle this issue. If there was, we would give them the resources. We would give them all the resources they want.

We saw last night Caranua getting the resources and what is it doing with them? It is setting up headquarters and appointing CEOs and a clatter of staff. The public person it was supposed to represent has been dismissed and diminished. We will celebrate the centenary of the Soloheadbeg ambush in a year and a half's time and the men who fought to give us our freedom. They are turning in their graves because we have been raped and plundered by big business and the systems that are supposed to protect the people. Senior officials the whole way across the board have become self-serving. It is all about career promotion and then they might be seconded someplace else, retire and go in as advisers and consultants the week after. It is rotten. It is a merry-go-round and it is rotten.

The ordinary people I represent on a daily basis are crying in anguish. They are sick and traumatised and many of them have gone to their grave by suicide because of the cock-up that happened with the banks in this country, because of the vulture funds and because of Mr. FitzPatrick and all of those people. This charade has been going on for ten years now. I thank the judge for keeping it going on long enough to find out the information. I have been down to the courts with families. I have been in the banks with families. They are merciless to those people. They are mercenaries who have no mercy or understanding for people. I call them mercenaries because that is what they are. That is what the officials in this case are too. They are not doing their job. They have a duty to be held to account. Mr. Appleby may not co-operate. He will probably get immunity like the official who shredded and burned all the files. He went down to St. John of God's, God help us. He may be ill and he has immunity from prosecution. It would not be in a Mills and Boon novel. One could not write it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Mattie McGrath is aware of the rules of the House.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I am. It is factual. We all know it because it is in the public domain thanks to the judge and the reports. There was a clampdown on the media and it could not be reported.

We had three decades of tribunals. I went up to the Taoiseach's office recently about the so-called investigation into NAMA because I object to the chair the judge appointed. It is another cover-up. We asked the question, which someone else also asked of the officials, what have all these tribunals cost us. I was told the figure is well north of three quarters of a billion euro. There has been one prosecution after 25 or 30 years. It is a joke. As I said, the solicitor went off from the DPP's office and we are told now he could not take a statement. He was unable to take a statement and he was working in the DPP's office for years and probably decades. Company law here is clearly smashed and broken by Anglo. We all know that. I have a small company. There are many people in companies. We know how delicate and difficult the law is. Compliance is very important. We have to obey and so does the ordinary man in the street, who has been put into penury. Their children and grandchildren have been put into penury as a result of the actions of these people. This sham of a trial that went on is a total smokescreen because they are all in it together. Certain senior politicians are in it. The senior civil servants are being rewarded and now they want to get a restoration of their pay and they want to get their privileged position back. They have their hands on the handlebars of power and it does not matter who is in government. It most definitely will not be the Minister, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, because she will probably be gone out of her office next week. I wish her well. It will be like St. Leo saying it was like that when he got here. They will be cavalier and move on. They will forget about the people and forget they were elected to represent the people and to stand by our Constitution. It has been made a mockery of throughout 2016 and in the past ten years because these people are not held accountable to anybody.

The new head of the ODCE picked up the pieces and ran off to the DPP. They are complaining they do not have the resources. The Minister has given them seven new gardaí. They had five already. We have problems in the gardaí too. They cannot even investigate themselves.

Did the Minister say there were six?

Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor

We gave them five accountants.

Deputy Mattie McGrath

I thought the Minister said seven. There are two yet to be appointed. I heard the Minister's speech and I listened to it. They cannot account for the million illegal breath tests that were never carried out. Who are we going to get honesty from? I want an outside agency brought in from a faraway country to come in here and clean up the ODCE and An Garda Síochána and deal with this. For years colleagues and I have been asking the Competition Authority to deal with many issues. We might as well be talking to the wall. They are toothless, useless and fruitless. They are the same as most of the quangos that have been set up. The Government and the last Government promised to get rid of quangos yet they are like mushrooms coming up. Every shower of rain there is a new one coming up and they are bigger and bigger. They are magic mushrooms. They are magic for jobs and positions. They are magic for them to bring in their advisers and friends and magic to do nothing but wave a wand and go hide and go asleep. They get offices and CEOs and pretend they are working. They go to conferences and travel the world but do not serve the people such as the people in Caranua who were the unfortunate victims of abuse. There are unfortunate victims here.

Over a decade or two decades, families that tried to make a living in small business have been destroyed. With regard to small business, yes, there is law but Deputy Pringle is right that the price of one's suit dictates who one knows and what one knows and it has not changed under this Government or this Taoiseach. The Taoiseach is retiring now and going off into the sunset. I wish him well in that. I do not wish him ill-health but we need an audit of all the regulatory bodies because they are not regulatory bodies. They are just compliance bodies. They are regulatory bodies for the ordinary people. The Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Bill 2017 is being forced at the moment. People who went out to clean rivers to stop bridges being taken away were prosecuted illegally by the fisheries board. We are passing legislation with gusto to make it legal retrospectively. They were fined. Some of them had to go to court three times and pay thousands of euro to barristers and solicitors. They were found guilty and named and shamed in the paper illegally. We cannot do anything with these people because they are too powerful. We just play games with them. It is on the agenda for next week finally to pass the Inland Fisheries (Amendment) Bill 2017. Honest people were trying to ensure rivers were safe and clean and that fish could live in them. They were trying to save roads, bridges and properties. They were prosecuted illegally by men in suits waving badges at them and now we are passing legislation here to make it legal. It stinks from high heaven. The Minister should be ashamed to be a part of it. She has been part of this Government and she supported the last one.

Deputy Catherine Murphy

I am sharing time with Deputy Ryan. In the Minister's opening statement, she spoke about people being frustrated and disappointed.

She is wide of the mark in using tame terms such as frustration and disappointment because people are outraged and furious and have a right to be.

The case in the courts this week must be a game changer. Otherwise, we may as well hang up our hats because nothing will change. Serious action must be taken as a consequence of what occurred. There is widespread acceptance and significant evidence that white-collar crime goes virtually unpunished in Ireland. This is why people are saying, "Here we go again."

The 2011 general election was supposed to be the election to change everything. People wanted reform and the introduction of systems and checks and balances that would prevent a recurrence of the types of behaviour that caused the crash. However, the fragmentation of our institutions and organisations continues and it is clear they cannot cope with the issues they face.

The website of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, features the following statement: "The mission of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is to improve the compliance environment for corporate activity in the Irish economy by encouraging adherence to the requirements of the Companies Acts, and bringing to account those who disregard the law." The office clearly failed in its mission in the recent court case.

I had dealings with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement when I was dealing with the issue of Siteserv, when there was definite evidence of a spike in the price of shares in a company that was heavily indebted. My contact with the office involved letters being sent back and forth on this matter. I was informed by the ODCE that it had no role in the matter and did not hold this type of information. If insider trading is not related to corporate responsibility, I do not understand the meaning of corporate responsibility.

In 2015, the Social Democrats sought to bring a solution to the table when we called for the establishment of an independent anti-corruption agency. We studied examples of similar agencies operating in other countries and made a proposal in the Dáil in December 2015. After our proposal was voted down by Fine Gael and the Labour Party, we persisted with calls for an anti-corruption agency and undertook extensive work on how such an agency would operate. Examples of such practice internationally informed our research. Two years after we first introduced this idea, the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, has decided to adopt certain aspects of it. However, he advocates that the agency should only operate in respect of the public service. If the recent case demonstrates anything, it is that such an agency should not only apply to the public service.

A functioning anti-corruption agency would prevent, investigate and prosecute corruption. Given that we have far too much fragmentation, the new agency would consolidate agencies charged with tackling corruption and strengthen the legislative framework in which they operate. It would help to rebuild trust and renew public and international confidence in Ireland as a place in which to do business - not dodgy business but clean and honest business.

When I was dealing with the Siteserv issue and the IBRC debacle, I was contacted by a remarkable number of people from the business world. What they wanted was to be able to operate in a country that was a fair and honest place in which to do business. They did not believe Ireland was such a place. To give an example, the report on the Garda training college in Templemore states that Garda staff assigned to administrative roles in the college had no training or experience in administration and no knowledge of public procurement or financial procedures. When this can occur in the college that trains gardaí, is it any wonder we do not take white-collar crime seriously at any level? What is required at political level is fundamental change, rather than postponing action until some time in the future.

Deputy Eamon Ryan

What is most frightening, worrying, alarming and shocking is the basic lack of competence that has been revealed in this case. Given that the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation has ultimate responsibility for the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the Minister and her officials have questions to answer. How did we end up with an agency that was not competent to do its most critical task? I do not believe the answer is related to a lack of resources. Six or seven years ago, towards the end of the Green Party's time in government, we requested a meeting with the then Director of Corporate Enforcement and specifically asked him whether the office had the resources it needed to carry out the critical task of identifying, among the carnage left by the banking crash, whether cases could be brought that would restore public confidence in the idea that inappropriate corporate activities would have consequences. We were given a clear and categorical commitment that resources were not a problem. I understand from reading more recent accounts that at critical times in the process, the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement was offered additional resources at every turn to manage what everyone knew would be some of the most critical cases in the history of the State in terms of restoring and building confidence in the judicial system.

For the past six or seven years, everyone has known that maintaining and restoring public confidence in the State has been one of the most important tasks facing us. What was revealed in the judicial decision to pull the recent case is incredibly worrying. While we must maintain due process in the judicial system, one of the strengths of this country, we must also ask why an agency utterly failed in its task to build an investigation in a proper, legal and considered manner. As well as the view that some people got away with things in the crash because we were unable or unwilling to prosecute, there is also a concern that from now on, the rest of the business world will conduct its activities without fear of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement.

Change is required. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement must maintain a rigorous guard over the accountancy profession, which failed completely before the crash to identify widespread inappropriate and illegal lending. In the legal profession, solicitors were signing off and approving conveyancing and documents where there was not proper title or the paperwork was incomplete. The legal system must know that the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is an A-rated, top-quality agency which always does its job. I am certain the profession does not believe that is the case today. Last but not least, the banking system must know that the final arbiter, namely, the courts, is in a position to completely hammer out illegal activity in the banking system. That faith has been shattered by the judgment delivered this week.

The Department, as the parent body of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, has a responsibility to find out why the agency was not competent to do its job. The Minister must present clear mechanisms for restoring public confidence in both the ODCE and the judicial system and ensuring business people know they are operating in an environment in which ethics and the rule of law apply. This must be done quickly because once public exasperation sets in, it is very hard to win back confidence. We will start winning back public confidence by ensuring the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement is competent but that notion was blown out of the water this week.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We will now take questions and answers for 20 minutes. I will take questions from three Deputies before asking the Minister to respond.

Deputy Bríd Smith

Tá ceist agam. I will argue that the Minister is scapegoating Mr. O'Connell and that he will be thrown under a bus for the problems this situation has raised. The Minister is really arguing in her statement that the Government is about to close the stable door now that the horse has bolted.

I will ask about the role of An Garda Síochána. It is usual practice for gardaí to question witnesses and take statements. They should have done so in respect of the EY auditors, who were questioned by Mr. O'Connell himself. In his evidence, Mr. O'Connell stated that the gardaí did not do it because, according to them, they were "flat out" working on other Anglo probes. What were those probes that were more important than this investigation into the activities of Mr. FitzPatrick and his loans? When a Garda assistant commissioner received a letter in June 2015 informing him that gardaí were not involved in taking these statements, why did the Garda not act? Will the Minister admit that the assurance that the Garda will act as the lead in all criminal investigations from now on bears no weight, given its criminal failure to deal with this matter?

I have a question on the role of EY in this situation. Is the Minister's Department or any other still hiring EY, giving it contracts and paying it for reports and advice? EY gave Anglo Irish Bank a clean bill of health just before the crash and the firm was taken on again to give advice and help in investigating the causes of the crash. Along with other elites and parts of the clique of the Irish wealthy and powerful, such as Goodbody, PwC etc., EY is part of the nexus of the rich and powerful, which Deputy Boyd Barrett referred to, who view it as their job to protect one another and their golden boys such as, for example, Mr. FitzPatrick.

Deputy Niall Collins

Did the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, at any time before or during the collapsed trial that is the subject of this discussion or during the previous collapsed trial raise issues with the Minister directly or with her Department about its capacity or the capacity of the DPP to mount the cases on behalf of the State? Is the Government open to considering extending the terms of reference of the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland to review the workings of the ODCE?

I referred to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Health and Safety Agency. What is their capacity to deal with white-collar crime?

What was the role of the chief investigator vis-à-vis the person's mental health and the action of shredding documents? Are other prosecutions pending in which that person was central in building the case on behalf of the State through his role in the ODCE? It would be important to know whether there are more calamities coming down the tracks.

Has the Minister, through her Department, plans to review and regulate the conflicts of interest among accountancy houses? Irrespective of whether there is a conflict of interest in reality, if there is even the perception of one, it is an issue. These accountancy practices are also assigned consultancies by the large clients that they audit. That is wrong. On one side they audit clients and are supposed to hold them to account in terms of checks and balances but, on the other, they are providing some other accountancy service in another section of the business. They are compromised, which is something that we need to examine.

What will be the consequences for EY of its botched auditing of Anglo Irish Bank?

Deputy Eugene Murphy

Time is short. I am obliged to give everyone a chance. The Deputy should conclude.

Deputy Joan Burton

Is the Minister going to set up, as she is entitled to do under company law, an inquiry by an independent person? The person who is the director of the ODCE is not independent in this. I know the questions are complex but I would like the Minister to answer them.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I would like the Minister to respond to the suggestion I made that this whole thing stinks to high heaven because the series of events simply defy credibility in terms of being characterised as blunders. Mr. O'Connell in court emphasised that many other people knew how the investigation was being conducted. According to him, the then Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, in March 2011 received a report outlining the progress of the investigation and noting that the extent to which witnesses required the assistance of legal advisers was unusual and uncommon in the experience of the Garda. Therefore, the then Minister knew. Will the Minister, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, confirm that the then Minister knew and explain why alarm bells did not ring? We were told the DPP in December 2010 was made aware of the manner in which the statements were taken to some extent, so the DPP knew there were problems with how statements were being taken. The Garda knew they were not taking the statements, even though this was not supposed to be the case, and that means the current Commissioner, Nóirín O'Sullivan, or the then Commissioner would have known. Are we asking them? Did the Minister's Department have any discussion with the Garda Commissioner or other gardaí about the irregularities? The lead prosecutor shredded documents, documents he said he never read, but there is no prosecution or no investigation into the shredding of the documents.

First, I said that I had asked the director of the ODCE to send me a report as soon as possible, that is, on or before 23 June.

The reason for this is that we do not have the transcript of the court case. Huge sections of it are closed off. It has been very sensitive. Even the jury was not there. I cannot investigate something when we do not know what happened in court. As I said, the director of the ODCE has gone to the courts to seek the transcript so that we will have a better sense of what is going on.

I am being asked questions left, right and centre. Everyone wants to protect the independence of the ODCE, the DPP and the courts. Yet some Deputies are then asking me to be answerable for the courts and the DPP. I am sorry; I cannot take questions that should be addressed to the DPP or to the judge. That is the way it is. I clearly stated in my opening remarks that I will get this report, go to the Attorney General and then come back to the Dáil. I will tell Deputies plain and squarely what happened. We can go from there to find solutions in order to ensure that this never happens again.

I say to Deputy Boyd Barrett that I equally know people in Dún Laoghaire who were absolutely affected. I was a school principal and there were children coming into our school who had suffered. He should not have this outrage as if we are all to blame. There were serious issues within that, irrespective of the resources. I will address resources in a moment. However, this was not down to resources. A person who shredded evidence and a person who coached witnesses - that is a totally different matter-----

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 25 May 2017

Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement: Statements

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 25 May 2017