The McDowell enforcement and compliance group was established because of what was coming to light. Some of the completed reports have been sent to the relevant authorities, which are defined in the Act and can be a court of competent jurisdiction, the Minister for Finance – who has to authorise the Revenue Commissioners to receive it – the DPP and the Central Bank. They are the only persons or groups entitled to the reports at the moment unless the body being inquired into gives permission. To date, no such permission has been forthcoming.
I accept the thrust of the Labour Party Bill and that the amendment is necessary. However, we need to broaden the groups covered by the Bill. For example, I would like to include the Revenue Commissioners, as of right; the Stock Exchange; accountancy and other professional bodies; over seas recognised authorities, such as the DTI in the UK; and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The point is that we cannot retrospectively apply it to the information I currently have. The case taken by Dunnes Stores, due to be heard on 13 April, is being made precisely on these points. Information which has been received is being given to authorities. Basically, a section 19 inquiry is a preliminary inquiry and, therefore, one is not entitled to give any information that one receives by way of a preliminary inquiry to any other body, which includes a tribunal.
However, much of the information which has come to light at the Moriarty tribunal, in particular, was brought to my attention because it refers to some of the companies under investigation. It seems that the institutions, banks and others, from whom information was sought have also provided the information to the tribunals of inquiry. The final reports are currently being drafted. When I receive them, it is clearly open to me to petition the High Court to have an inspector appointed in many cases and they would then become public documents. The issues are so serious that they should be in the public domain and not just go to competent authorities.
The Deputies assume that we will oppose the Bill, although the Government has not formalised its view. I will strongly recommend that the Bill is supported and amended but, unfortunately, it cannot apply to the current inquiries. I wish it were otherwise because section 19 can bring a great deal of information to light but the restriction is that the body in question must give permission for its publication.