Vol. 432 No. 5
8 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
11 Mr. McGahon asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
15 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
30 Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
36 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe, in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
44 Mr. Nealon asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
49 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Minister for Justice the discussions, if any, she proposes to have with the Garda Síochána, and with other police authorities in Europe, in respect of the possible use of the proposed tax amnesty for money laundering by criminals.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 8, 11, 15, 30, 36, 44 and 49 together.
The Garda is aware from the reports in the media of the proposals by the Minister for Finance to facilitate the repatriation of certain moneys. When this legislation comes into force any breaches of it will be investigated in the normal way.
The possibility that criminals would use the proposed amnesty for money laundering purposes will certainly be the subject of Garda attention and Deputies will be aware that the preparation of legislation on the subject of money laundering generally is at an advanced stage of preparation in my Department.
Would the Minister not agree that it would have been wiser for the Government to have fulfilled its obligation under EC law to ban money laundering in advance of the introduction of a tax amnesty for undisclosed funds?
The parliamentary draftsman, the Department and the Government are moving as rapidly as possible to comply with the proposal to introduce confiscation of proceeds of crime legislation. As the Deputy will appreciate, that Bill is a very comprehensive and detailed measure, the drafting of which is nearing completion. I hope to introduce the Bill, with the Government's approval, at the earliest possible date. I hope it will be before the House in the autumn session.
Is the Minister aware that on 10 June 1991 the Government agreed that by January of this year a ban on money laundering as well as an obligation on banks and professionals to disclose information about the source of funds would be part of Irish law? Is she further aware that on 10 March of this year the European Community initiated legal proceedings against her and the Government for failure to implement the ban on money laundering? Is she aware that it is perceived as a calculated insult to proceed with a tax amnesty on undisclosed funds without complying with a clear legal obligation under EC law to ban money laundering?
I can only repeat what I have said already, and I hate repeating myself. The Bill to comply with EC regulations in this regard is at a very advanced stage of drafting. It will be published shortly and will be before the House in the autumn session. It is of deep regret to me that it is not possible to introduce the Bill before the Dáil rises for the summer recess.
Will the Minister ask the Minister for Finance to agree to postpone the proposals for a tax amnesty until after the promised legislation on money laundering has been dealt with, legislation which by law we are obliged to have enacted?
The matter to which the Deputy refers is clearly one for another Minister.
The Government is collectively responsible.
That is so, but the amnesty is a matter for the Minister for Finance.
Will the Minister tell the House whether the matters raised by Deputy Bruton were considered by Cabinet in making a decision to introduce this ill-judged amnesty? Is it the Minister's advice that a distinction can be made between the repatriation of moneys that would qualify under the terms of the amnesty as the Government perceives it and moneys that originated from various criminal activities? Is the Minister advised that such a distinction can be drawn?
On the first question, Deputy Rabbitte well knows that what might or might not have been considered in the course of the Cabinet coming to a decision is a matter of Cabinet confidentiality. Therefore I regret I cannot share any secrets with Deputy Rabbitte. In his statement of 2 June, when outlining the broad provisions of the operation of the amnesty, the Minister for Finance made it clear that the benefits of the scheme would not apply to the proceeds of crime, whether held within the jurisdiction or elsewhere. He stated that those detailed provisions would be contained in the legislation in due course.
In light of the fact that the head of a Colombian drugs cartel who was eventually caught by the police authorities was found to have US$130 million in 82 accounts in 16 different countries — a similar case occurred in Australia — and in the interests of the detection of crime, will the Minister ensure that provisions are included in the legislation dealing with the amnesty requiring the Revenue Commissioners to ensure that tax paid under the amnesty was made from legal earnings?
The Minister for Finance has already clarified that matter. However, I have no difficulty in speaking to that Minister about the points raised by the Deputies today.
May I ask the Minister how the Garda will satisfy itself that moneys paid under the tax amnesty do not have a criminal origin in the absence of powers which she is obliged to have introduced in Irish law under the EC directive to oblige bank managers and accountants to disclose the true ownership of nominee accounts and to obtain information and identification of people lodging money with them? Is there a coincidence in the fact that the Government is proceeding with the tax amnesty before giving the Garda those necessary powers, which under the EC directive it should have since 1 January last, and for failure to provide which the Minister is being sued?
I have to dissuade Members from the notion that the tax amnesty may be discussed now.
The question relates to Garda powers.
The implication in the Deputy's supplementary that the Government delayed the Bill on the confiscation of proceeds of crime until after the announcement of the tax amnesty provisions is incorrect. There is no connection between the two matters. As I said, I would have preferred to deal with the confiscation of proceeds of crime legislation before the end of this session. That has not been possible, not because of delay on anybody's part but because it is such a comprehensive measure we have to be very careful we get it right. The Bill will be introduced it the autumn. Questions on the tax amnesty and how it might work should be addressed to the Minister for Finance.
It will be too late at that stage. The people concerned will have laundered money by then.
Will the Minister provide that the transactions of limited companies be deemed void unless the identity of the persons involved is revealed? That might avoid some of the difficulties that would arise.
I cannot give a definitive answer on that matter but I will certainly discuss it with the Minister for Finance.
