Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Oct 1993

Vol. 434 No. 9

Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Creation of Third Banking Force.

Proinsias De Rossa

Question:

11 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to the fact that a company (details supplied) with which one of his advisers is associated and which is retained by his Department is also reported to have been retained by ACC to lobby against the proposal in the Programme for a Partnership Government 1993 to 1997 for the creation of a third banking force, including the ACC; his views on whether this role is appropriate for an adviser to his Department; the steps, if any, he intends to take in view of the possible conflict of interest that may arise; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The Taoiseach

Dr. Con Power was employed as special economic development officer to me, as Taoiseach, from 1 April 1992 to 30 April 1993.

From 1 May 1993 a consultancy firm, Nemesis Limited, of which Dr. Power is a director, agreed a contract with my Department for the completion of the projects Dr. Power had been undertaking prior to 1 May.

Dr. Power was never employed in the role of adviser in my Department as alleged by the Deputy. I do not believe that — since Dr. Power was no longer special economic development officer to the Taoiseach — there was a conflict of interest between the work Nemesis Limited was carrying out for the Department of the Taoiseach and the work it carried out for ACC Limited.

I draw to the Deputy's attention that, in their work for ACC Limited, Nemesis Limited made clear that its work was intended to reconcile the relevant provisions of the Programme for a Partnership Government and of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.

Proinsias De Rossa

I have two questions for the Taoiseach. One relates to correspondence I received from Nemesis dated 14 October. I submitted my question on Tuesday, 12 October. On Thursday morning, 14 October, I received a letter from Dr. Con Power of Nemesis indicating that he was aware of the question I had submitted. Is it common practice for questions to be touted outside the House before they are answered in this House? How could this have happened? Is it not a breach of the privilege of this House?

I put it to the Taoiseach that Dr. Con Power was employed by his Department as a consultant, even though it may be argued that it was on secondment from an outside agency. Will he agree it was inappropriate for Dr. Power to be employed in that capacity and at the same time take on a job of seeking to undermine the Programme for Government which was drafted before May of this year.

The Taoiseach

I deplore any action by anybody in the system to let outsiders know what questions were tabled or to pass information. I will certainly have that matter investigated.

Deputy De Rossa also asked whether this role was appropriate for an adviser to my Department. I clearly stated that this man is not, was not and never was an adviser to my Department. I have laid before this House a lengthy statement setting out the conditions of the contract and it is in the Oireachtas Library for anybody who cares to read it. I set out Dr. Power's functions clearly — to finish work on the projects in which he was involved at that time. He was not an adviser and, consequently, I reject the suggestion by Deputy De Rossa that this role was inappropriate for him. There was a question of reconciliation between the Programme for Economic and Social Progress and the Programme for Government. Dr. Power made it quite clear that this was the role he was following. Indeed I would add that his assignment was for two months, July and August.

Proinsias De Rossa

I suggest that the matter cannot be brushed aside so readily. The fact that Dr. Power was in possession of information with regard to my question within a maximum of 48 hours of the question having been put down — given that I had a letter from him within 48 hours — seems to indicate that the lines of communication between this company, or this man and the Taoiseach's Department, are extremely close. There must be some expectation of criticism of the role adopted by Dr. Power in regard to this matter, working as a consultant to the Government on the one hand and, on the other, taking on a job of undermining the Programme for Government.

The Taoiseach

I do not think that any Deputy would try to muddy the waters in regard to a clearly defined role. What this man was doing is set down clearly, and is available in the Library of the House; he was following up particular projects in which he was engaged after his terms of reference and employment had changed. If he were an adviser to my Department, the Deputy would be right to complain on the basis that there would be a conflict of interest. However, he was not an adviser to my Department and there is no way that working on the other project brought him into conflict with what we are talking about. One could say that ACC should have chosen somebody else but that is another question to be addressed in a different way. I have already said that I totally abhor any breach of privilege in regard to putting down questions or interfering with responses to them. I will have the matter investigated. If I had known before I came in here today what the Deputy was going to say I would have had it investigated and told the Deputy what I believe might have happened. I am not in a position to do that now.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

Was the Taoiseach's attitude to this matter coloured to some degree by the fact that he does not seem over-enthusiastic about a third banking force and might be happy to see a case well argued against it?

The Taoiseach

The objectives are clearly set out in the Programme for Government. The setting up of companies by the IDA or State-sponsored commercial bodies in the international financial services that will offer supporting services is one aspect. The other is there is a belief that if we put this third banking force together it would have to have an international bank as a partner, one could conceivably say that ACC was making its pitch to have the first international bank in as a partner and proceed from there. It cannot be condemned for what it was trying to do because it can legitimately claim it is trying to form the basis of the third banking force in this country.