Vol. 550 No. 5
10 Mr. D. Carey asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the company investigations initiated by her Department; the current situation in this regard; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [9369/02]
20 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the total costs incurred by the State, at the latest date for which figures are available, arising from the various inquiries instigated by or on behalf of her Department; the element of these costs which have been recovered from the other parties involved; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [9477/02]
38 Ms O'Sullivan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the position regarding each of the inquiries being carried out by or on behalf of her Department; the projected date for the conclusion of each such investigation; the inquiries in respect of which reports have been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [9476/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10, 20 and 38 together.
Sixteen investigations into company law related matters have been initiated by me since I came into office. In respect of three of these, on an application by me, the High Court appointed inspectors under section 8 of the Companies Act, 1990. These three inquiries are continuing. I am not in a position to say when the reports of the High Court inspectors will be completed or published in any of these cases.
One investigation under section 14 of the Companies Act, 1990 was completed in 1998. The report on this has been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Eleven investigations were initiated under section 19 of the Companies Act, 1990. Four of these have been concluded. Of the four investigations completed, two of the reports were passed to the DPP. The file in one case was returned and a number of summary prosecutions have since been successfully concluded. One report provided an input into the successful application to the High Court for the appointment of inspectors under section 8 while the fourth report was passed to the relevant High Court inspectors.
Five investigations under section 19 are ongoing. Reports in respect of two of these are at an advanced stage of completion, with the remaining three reports expected to be completed during the course of 2002. Two investigations were held up in legal appeals; certain legal matters are still outstanding. It is a matter for the Director of Corporate Enforcement to decide how to proceed on these latter investigations.
One investigation was undertaken under section 59 of the Insurance Act, 1989. This report has been completed and referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions as well as to the inspectors undertaking the section 8 investigation into that company.
The costs incurred since 1997 on company investigations initiated by or on behalf of my Department currently amount to €8.267 million. This amount does not include the salary costs of Civil Service staff working on a number of these investigations. Similarly, the major proportion of the legal costs relating to the investigations is being borne by the Vote of the Chief State Solicitor. Most of this €8.267 million derives from the costs to date of the High Court inspectors appointed under section 8, that is, the NIB/NIBFS which is €4.5 million and Ansbacher, which is €2.5 million.
The question of recovering costs from the section 8 investigations does not arise until the inspectors have completed their investigations. Section 19 as originally enacted did not provide for recouping costs. This has now changed with the enactment of the Company Law Enforcement Act, 2001.
I will take two supplementary questions, one from Deputy Flanagan and one from Deputy Rabbitte, and then a final reply from the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment.
I will be brief, although it has to be said this is the last opportunity in this Dáil that we will have to seek information on this matter from the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. In 1997, she came into office waving this flag quite overtly and vigorously. Five years later, could she quantify her legacy in terms of achieving what she said she would achieve on the occasion of her initial announcements. Particularly in the Ansbacher cases, does she now concede that the long awaited report will not be published before the dissolution of this House? Specifically on consequent action on the publication of the report, whenever that might be, does she envisage a major problem with prosecution due to the statute of limitations?
Can the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment throw any light on the recent report, which, I think, was in the Irish Independent, about a new list of Ansbacher type depositors having been unearthed recently?
In reply to Deputy Flanagan, the recent changes in company law mean that prosecutions can be forthcoming. It is no longer the case that one must detect the wrongful behaviour within three years of it occurring – that restriction has now been lifted.
On the legacy, if he wants to call it that, I did not come into office claiming to do all these things. I did not anticipate that I would be involved in so many inquiries. They all flowed from the McCracken report, which did not come to hand until the autumn of 1997, and one inquiry led to another.
The more important legacy is that there are now procedures in place. The company law has been radically reformed and there is a new independent officer, the Director of Corporate Enforcement. The resources applied to this area have been greatly enhanced with appropriate staff – accountants, lawyers and members of the Garda Síochána. Instead of one and a half officials being responsible for enforcing the law in this area, there is now a properly resourced office.
The Company Registration Office has been working extremely efficiently and effectively. To his credit, Deputy Rabbitte provided the change in resources for that office. Most people would recognise that it is performing with such success that it is often the source of great complaint from companies that they must fulfil the most basic requirement.
In reply to Deputy Rabbitte, I am not aware of the source of that article. I understand it was quoting Revenue sources. The list which came to light in my inquiries included about 120 names. I am aware that additional names were added to that but I have no evidence to suggest it exceeds 600, which, I think, was the content of the story on Monday. I do not have that information.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
