Ivor Callely
Question:9 Mr. Callely asked the Minister for Finance the progress, if any, the Revenue authorities have made to target criminal and drug barons; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11552/97]
Other Questions. - Criminal Assets Confiscation.
The Deputy will be aware that targeting the people to whom he refers is being undertaken by the Criminal Assets Bureau which was set up in July 1996 specifically for this purpose and which was placed on a statutory basis on 15 October 1996 following the enactment of the Criminal Assets Bureau Act, 1996. The bureau was established to bring together in a more structured way the resources and expertise of the various agencies, including the Garda Síochána, the Revenue authorities and the Department of Social Welfare, involved in this difficult work. All the agencies, including the Revenue Commissioners, are co-operating fully in the work of the bureau.
The main objectives of the bureau are identification of assets, wherever situated, which derive or are suspected to derive directly or indirectly from criminal activity and the taking of appropriate action to deprive the asset holders of those assets or the benefit of them. The bureau is headed by a chief superintendent and has staff drawn from the Garda Síochána, the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social Welfare. This ensures close and concerted co-operation between all State agencies in dealing with the proceeds of crime. Working together and with the back-up of general Garda resources, bureau staff have mounted a focused attack on the illegally acquired assets of criminals involved in serious crime by seizing and freezing their assets, ensuring that such assets are made liable to tax as appropriate and ensuring social welfare payments are withdrawn from those not entitled to them.
Section 1 of the Disclosure of Certain Information for Taxation and Other Purposes Act, 1996 enables the Revenue Commissioners to provide information to a Garda chief superintendent, including the head of the Criminal Assets Bureau, where they have reasonable grounds for suspecting the information relates to a person who has derived profits from an unlawful activity, where they are of the opinion that it may be of value to an investigation and that it is in the public interest to provide it. This provision has enabled the Revenue Commissioners to provide much valuable information to the bureau.
While it would not be appropriate for me to go into operational details of cases being pursued, it is clear the Criminal Assets Bureau is making a huge impact with the co-operation of the Revenue Commissioners and other agencies.
Will the Minister clarify the value of assets seized or frozen by the Criminal Assets Bureau, the establishment of which was welcomed, say, in the last three months of last year and the first three months of this year, the assets which have been sold and the number of social welfare payments withdrawn? What progress has been made? Members of our communities are suffering because of the activities in which these criminals are engaged. I appreciate that certain individuals are behind bars in other jurisdictions but there are others who own fine properties who seem to be able to retain their assets.
Considerable assets in one form or another have been seized. Some of these have been sold — the Deputy will be aware of a recent case involving the sale of a vessel in Galway. I do not have the information with me but I will obtain it from the relevant authorities and the CAB and send it to the Deputy.
Has it been brought to the Minister's attention that some of the bureau's powers need to be strengthened? I tabled this question because of the perception in the community that the Minister for Justice has been soft on crime and that the criminal was the winner in 1996. I would like to think that the bureau, under the Minister's direction, will put paid to this perception.
The Criminal Assets Bureau, which has been very successful, reflected policy propositions made by Deputies, including members of my party, and was welcomed by all sides of the House. Deputy Gregory had called for some time for the establishment of a bureau along these lines. There have been explicit reports in the media on a number of cases taken by the officers of the bureau. I am in regular contact with the chairman of the Revenue Commissioners and the Chief Superintendent of the bureau and I have not been requested to give the bureau additional powers. However, I would respond positively to such a request. I had meetings with the Revenue Commissioners, the Garda and others concerning the increased powers given to the Revenue Commissioners and the Garda in the confiscation of illegal cigarettes. These powers were provided for in the Finance Bill which was passed by the House yesterday.
There is no doubt that the bureau has made an impact. One case which is under appeal relates to the taxation liabilities of the wife of a well known criminal who is behind bars. As that case is before the courts I will not comment further on it. The bureau is working well and I have not received a request to give it additional powers or resources. However, if such a request is made I will respond to it positively in view of the concerns we all have. We are getting on top of the problem, however slowly.
The Minister is obviously constrained in terms of what he can say about the case which the CAB effectively lost and is now under appeal. I would not expect him to comment on the merits or otherwise of the judgment.
Will the Minister agree that if it transpires a change in the law is necessary so that spouses must justify much more clearly their assets and take responsibility for the significant assets in their possession then that change should be implemented? Will he also agree that any necessary change in the law to trace assets to family members and proxies who hold assets for people should also be introduced? Will he further agree there should be a presumption in law that in certain circumstances the onus will be on the recipient, family member, spouse or proxy to show that the assets are not Criminal Asset Bureau type assets? At present the onus is on the CAB to prove that a son or daughter knew or ought to have known that the moneys in question were derived from criminal behaviour.
Beneficiaries of resources which have been derived by others from criminal activity are covered by the legislation. The case to which I referred related to taxation and not to matters under the remit of the CAB. This case is under appeal and, pending the outcome, I cannot comment further on it. Our intention is in line with the proposition put forward by the Deputy. I will have to await the judgment in this case to see what subsequent action, if any, is necessary.
We set out with the CAB to attack criminals by stripping them of assets which had been illegally obtained in every sense of the word. To the best of my knowledge, and without revealing operational secrets, the CAB is operating effectively and vigorously.
Having campaigned in favour of it and tabled questions to the Minister, I welcomed the establishment of the Criminal Assets Bureau. However, I am concerned that minor criminal cases which come to the attention of the Revenue Commissioners and minor cases which come to the attention of the Minister for Social Welfare — for example, where a person involved in drug dealing in a small way is claiming social welfare — are referred to the Criminal Assets Bureau. This is being done because officials in the Department who lack the anonymity of those in the bureau are, rightly, afraid to get involved in even the most minor cases.
The Criminal Assets Bureau does not have the manpower, resources or time to deal with this huge volume of work. I am not talking about cases involving major drug dealers but rather the range of criminal activity which the bureau, rightly, appears willing to take on. I hoped the bureau would make the major heroin dealers a priority at the start. Will the Minister examine this matter to see if the workload is such that many of the cases being brought to the attention of the bureau cannot be acted upon because it does not have the time, manpower or resources?
I will raise the matter with the relevant authorities to see if this is the case. It was not the intention when it was being established, or when I spoke to the operational personnel who head it up, that the bureau would deal with minor cases of the type referred to by the Deputy. The intention was that its primary focus would be on serious crime and criminals. In so far as one wishes to make a distinction between serious and petty criminals, it was not intended to give the bureau this responsibility. I will make inquiries and let the Deputy know the position.
One of the main achievements of the Garda has been the move against a heroin dealer named Mullins, who is referred to as the boxer. That individual is now in custody in Britain and has been brought before the courts. This case highlights the growing trend among drug dealers to move to Britain where they invest in property and businesses. With the exception of Mullins, who was caught red-handed with a great amount of money, drug dealers appear to be able to do this at will. Dealers who have invested the money they made from drug dealing here in businesses in England appear to be eluding the Garda and the Criminal Assets Bureau. Will the Minister inquire from the bureau whether there is a need for additional powers or a new strategy to deal with that problem? It would be an appalling injustice if these people were allowed to set up business in Manchester, Birmingham or even Amsterdam and live in luxury on the misery of their victims in this country.
I share the Deputy's concern which I suspect is the concern of every Deputy. I will make inquiries along the lines he suggests and, depending on what my inquiries reveal, we will then decide the type of action that is necessary. During the Irish Presidency, the Taoiseach highlighted the need for greater co-operation between the various police forces of the European Union, specifically to address the issue of cross-border crime and drug related crime in particular. Our position in this area is well known and we would be anxious to pursue people who might be availing of the possibilities to which the Deputy referred.
In addition to a European convention on extradition, we need a convention on criminal assets. I acknowledge money laundering legislation is in place, but at the next European conference the Minister attends he should raise the possibility of setting up some type of criminal bankruptcy order system. That would enable every EU member state do what is currently being done in relation to the McCracken tribunal. The Criminal Assets Bureau would be entitled to go to the English courts and get an order in aid to freeze assets in certain circumstances. If such a measure was introduced under a European wide convention, people would not be buying flats in Marbella, Amsterdam or London.
I agree with the Deputy. We need more integrated forms of co-operation in this area. The Deputy will recall that at the Cannes Summit, the British Prime Minister, Mr. Major, raised various difficulties about greater EUROPOL co-operation, particularly where the question of access to courts might be perceived in the UK as an infringement on the sovereignty of the United Kingdom. If there is a change of Government in the United Kingdom, and I hope there is, that kind of reservation will go. Nobody benefits from providing a safe harbour for criminals from another member state of the European Union, particularly when most if not all of these crimes are drug related.