John Bruton
Question:23 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if the Government intend to establish a serious fraud office; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Establishment of Serious Fraud Office.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:24 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will clarify his comments made in an RTE radio interview on 22 September 1991 regarding the possible establishment of a serious fraud squad within the Office of the Attorney General; if his attention has been drawn to the serious reservations expressed by some of the Garda representative bodies about such a move; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 23 and 24 together.
The Minister for Justice has been asked to report to the Government on measures to improve the capacity of the criminal justice system to deal with large scale fraud, taking fully into account the views of the various Departments, offices and other bodies, and to submit proposals in this regard as soon as possible.
The Minister's report will cover the various possibilities that exist and will, of necessity, involve examination of the approach adopted in other countries, including the arrangements which have been put in place in the UK and will also involve strengthening the capability of the Garda Fraud Squad.
The Government will, of course, look at all the options, including the particular model of a serious fraud office under the Attorney General's Office, to which I referred in the RTE interview on 22 September 1991.
Would it be unfair to characterise the Taoiseach's answer as something of a retreat from the commitment he gave on the radio to the establishment of a serious fraud office?
If that is the most serious allegation the Deputy makes against me I accept it with equanimity. No, I do not regard it as a retreat. In that radio interview — I am sure the Deputy listened to it very carefully and closely — I indicated that this was one way of attempting to deal with the serious situation which has arisen here. There is no doubt that when these reprehensible events burst on an unsuspecting public — and Government — it became clear that we did not have the mechanisms to deal with them. Deputy Garret FitzGerald was Taoiseach for a considerable number of years——
There were no frauds.
There were major frauds. Let us recall Irish Shipping.
Was that a fraud?
Irish Shipping was a major fraud, it was totally dishonest——
Why did the Taoiseach promise to relaunch it?
We are deviating from the question.
Irish Shipping was a magnificent Irish company and it was brought down by a series of——
Bad management.
Bad management and bad contracts entered into.
But that is not fraud.
Those contracts were frauds.
I think the Taoiseach needs navigational aids.
When Deputy Garret FitzGerald was Taoiseach there were a number of major difficulties in the semi-State sector and his Government did not put into operation any mechanisms for dealing with the situation. I should like to draw this distinction; when Deputy Garret Fitzgerald and his Government were handling those matters they received full co-operation from us in Opposition, which is completely unlike the behaviour of the parties in Opposition at present. Deputy Garret FitzGerald knows that in regard to the major difficulties in these areas which confronted his Government he sought, and immediately secured, the full co-operation of the Opposition parties in dealing with them, on one occasion helping to rush legislation through this House.
As we did last year with the Goodman affair.
That is the significant difference between the responsible attitude we took as a party in Opposition and the behaviour of the parties opposite on this occasion.
I advise the House that the time has come to deal with Priority Questions. Under Standing Orders of the House 15 minutes must be provided for Priority Questions, and it must commence now.
May I ask a short supplementary question?
It is going to take up the time of Priority Questions. I have no control over that Standing Order; it is very rigid in that regard. Even Members insist on the Chair being firm from time to time.
May I ask that Questions Nos. 34 and 35 in my name be deferred?
The Deputy can be facilitated in that regard.
Questions Nos. 34 and 35 postponed.