Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2012

Vol. 761 No. 1

Mahon Tribunal Report: Statements (Resumed)

I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak on the findings of the Mahon tribunal report. I wish to raise four separate points - first the findings and what they say about Irish politics; second, the findings in regard to my party, the Labour Party; third, the recommendations of the report, many of which I agree with but concerning some of which I would have certain opinions; four, the fundamental need for local government reform as a lasting legacy for Irish citizens, today and for generations to come.

I refer to the findings. This report is a damning indictment of the toxic political culture Fianna Fáil has brought to every level of political life in Ireland. It gives me no pleasure to read this report or to discover the level of poison, lies, corruption and bribery that has been such a feature of Irish politics in the past. It should be remarked that there are many decent and disappointed members of the Fianna Fáil Party but their emotions are secondary to those of our citizens whose lives and communities have been broken by the Fianna Fáil style of politics. When a political party such as Fianna Fáil believes it owns Ireland and has the title deeds of the country in its back pockets any action by a member of the party is seen as excusable as long as he or she remains electable. The only value Fianna Fáil holds dear is electability. No lies, corruption or allegations of bribery ever matter to Fianna Fáil because to its members the party is everything and politics is just a game. It is not good enough to act like an infantile football manager, claiming one did not see the incident, blaming the referee and retreating to the dressing room, telling the team they must win at all costs. This is not a game - it is national politics. It is far too grave and important for such pathetic behaviour.

Fianna Fáil was the party of all my grandparents but it became the home place for every cowboy seeking career advancement because they knew the party no longer had any standards. The issue is not just corruption - it is about the manner in which corruption is treated. Accusations against Fianna Fáil members, councillors, Ministers, and leaders were treated with derision. The party defended the indefensible, prioritising stroke politics and hoping the people would believe that all politicians were the same and all political parties were on the take. They succeeded because standards in Irish politics flattened. As a society we must examine why every Deputy mentioned in the Mahon report continued to enjoy massive support from the electorate. Fianna Fáil Deputies rightly point to those mentioned in the Moriarty report yet Fianna Fáil was happy to enjoy the support of Deputy Michael Lowry for its Government until last year, regardless of what evidence was heard during the course of the Moriarty tribunal hearings.

Not all political parties are the same. One party of long-term government stands head and shoulders above the rest when it comes to backhand politics. That party is Fianna Fáil. Fianna Fáil now has the country it shaped. No other party had the influence over Irish life it has had. With the party in power for 22 of the last 25 years, Ireland is now what Fianna Fáil created - a country effectively run by the IMF, with a demoralised people who view politics with suspicion and cynicism. I can barely utter the word for my job - politician. Fianna Fáil has destroyed the words "republican" and "politician". It is clear from listening to the contributions from many Fianna Fáil Members in the House today and yesterday that nothing has really changed. They joined the party knowing its history of corruption and remained members even though the party surrendered this Republic to the IMF. They can do no more damage. Fianna Fáil has no role in the future of politics in this country.

I turn to the issue of the Mahon report's findings in respect of the Labour Party. The attempt in some quarters to paint all politicians and all political parties with the same brush in the wake of the Mahon report does not stand up to scrutiny. The Labour Party has a proud record of standing up and speaking out against what this report has proved to have been corrupt practices. It is important to note that in 1993 the Labour Party expelled the one and only one public representative linked to the party about whom the Mahon report is critical. John O'Halloran was elected as a councillor in Lucan in 1991. In September 1993 he was expelled from the Labour Party as a result of his voting record on planning matters while he was a member of Dublin County Council. The Labour Party was proactive in dealing with such issues as they arose and had no need to wait for a tribunal to be called or for its findings to be published to act decisively. In contrast to others, Labour Party councillors on Dublin County Council had a proud record in planning matters. Specifically mentioned in the Mahon report are, on page 1,068, the Minister, Deputy Pat Rabbitte's actions in returning a cheque to Frank Dunlop in 1992, and on page 1,579, the Tánaiste, Deputy Eamon Gilmore's decision to refuse a cheque from Monarch developers in 1992, both of which were described by the tribunal as commendable. The Minister, Deputy Joan Burton's consistent record in opposing rezoning at Quarryvale is also highlighted. That is the difference between the Labour Party and others who engaged in, or ignored, corruption.

I refer to the recommendations of the Mahon report and the need for fundamental reform of local government. The recommendations are far reaching and deal in the main with anti-corruption legislation and reforming the planning procedure in our local authorities. The fundamental reform of our political system is not the abolition of the Seanad, although I support it, or the reduction of the number of Deputies in the House, although I support that too. It is the reform of local government - the connectivity of the vote of the citizen to the responsibilities and accountability of the councillor and to the functions of the local authority, which are of such importance to each local authority in the country.

Local elections in Ireland are notable for poor turnout, being used mainly as a referendum on the national Government of the day, typified by misunderstanding of the role of local councils, and sometimes for allowing councillors to be elected with merely a few hundred votes. This dynamic must change and the reform of local government must involve the levelling of local taxation, including a property charge and a rebalancing of powers away from unelected officials towards the elected councillors, who by the very nature of the reformed system will be more accountable to the people.

Writing in last week's The Irish Times Diarmuid Ó Grada cites some of the anomalies in the local government system in Ireland. Leitrim has one councillor for every 1,444 constituents while Fingal has one councillor for every 11,377 constituents. A local government system with fewer councils and fewer councillors is surely desirable. Accountable local politicians who set the rates and take responsibility for formulating budgets around areas of policy such as waste disposal would prevent the type of debacle we have seen in Dublin city recently with the privatisation of the bin service.

I refer to the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal, which are wide and varied and deal with planning, conflicts of interest, political finance, lobbying, bribery, corruption in office, money laundering and asset confiscation. In terms of the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 and 1906, there are recommendations on the specific act of bribery. However, as both Acts are over 100 years old and society has changed radically since their introduction, the Minister for Justice and Equality needs to completely overhaul the legislation and make it more robust and relevant to the modern age. In planning, the overarching watchdog for council development plans, that is, the national development plan and the national spatial strategy, must be placed on a statutory footing. I have some concerns about two recommendations. Recommendation 12 states: "The Tribunal is recommending that where the elected members decide to depart from the recommendations made in the Manager's Report [of a development plan], they should be required to state their reasons for doing so." Recommendation 14 states: "The tribunal is recommending that the Minister for the Environment's ability to give directions to Regional Authorities and Local Planning Authorities should be entrusted to a Planning Regulator." Both recommendations assume the corruptibility of the elected councillor and Minister but do not take account of the potential corruptibility of the unelected official or proposed independent planning regulator. The democratic legitimacy of all agencies of the State is key to how we rebuild democracy. It is from the people that political representatives gain their mandate and it is a deficit of accountability in the past which has lead to corruption. While not rejecting these recommendations in totality, it is important that the balance of power within local authorities edges towards those who are elected, not those who are appointed.

This report gives our democracy a chance to change, to be reinforced, to re-engage with the people, and to reform in such a way that we never return to the type of politics that have brought such disgrace to this Republic. We must expect better and demand better from ourselves and from those who play leading roles in public life and from those who cast their votes. Fianna Fáil stroke politics is over. Our Republic demands better.

I have a sense of déjà vu in speaking on this matter because it is the second occasion in just over 12 months that the Dáil has received and debated a tribunal report into political corruption. The findings of the Mahon tribunal are depressingly predictable. The story of political corruption in this State has been told chapter by chapter in the pages of tribunal reports. The reports, though free-standing, blend one into another and piece by piece the jigsaw comes together. The Mahon report echoes the Moriarty report. The hands of politicians were greased by rich people seeking and securing lucrative political favours. The conclusion of the Mahon report is that corruption was systemic and pervaded public life. Some politicians operated what amounted to an extortion racket – procuring what they defined as donations for political favour. Those that should have acted were not prepared to take it on or to make it stop. That is also a conclusion of the Mahon report.

Abuse of public office was found at every level, from councillors to Ministers to taoisigh in a top-down, bottom-up toxic political culture. The Mahon report is just the latest revelation in a litany of corruption, maladministration and breaches of fundamental trust by the political establishment. Public confidence in the entire system of public administration has been deeply undermined. People ask whether the behaviour of the political class is consistent with any real claim that this State is a functioning Republic. Do we live in a Republic? That is a question on the minds of people across the land. In a Republic, the people are in charge, decision making is dedicated to the collective good, public moneys and natural resources are deployed in the collective interest and the democratic institutions are transparent and accountable. Could anyone plausibly argue that this is how the State is run? Some view Mahon and indeed Moriarty as products of the bad old days and would have us believe all is changed but that is not the case. The Mahon report identifies outstanding deficiencies in the planning system and recommends independent oversight of the process. It is a sensible recommendation and must be delivered on by the Government.

Deputy Martin, having basked in the reflected glory of Bertie Ahern for 14 years, now sheds crocodile tears. Deputy O'Dea, having brazenly tried to torpedo the tribunal, offers up half-baked explanations. The Mahon report has called time on their posturing. The cat is out of the bag and Fianna Fáil is engaged in nothing more than damage limitation. There is no big change.

The Government benches, with Fine Gael and the Labour Party, may crow at this turn of events but they also have questions to answer. The Moriarty report made that clear. If we have a Government committed to cleaning up politics in this State and one concerned with planning irregularities, how is it that the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, shut down public inquiries into planning matters across local authorities as one of his first acts in office? These are now carried out in private but the question arises as to why this is the case. If the Mahon report and other tribunal reports prove anything, it is the absolute need for the public gaze to be shone on these matters and the need for accountability and transparency. The Minister and the Government may huff and puff but they need to answer why they shut down those inquiries. What might they be trying to conceal?

The depressing part of this Mahon report is that it will not fundamentally change anything. I hope its recommendations are implemented, that there is reform of local government and that finally we can have a transparent and open method of funding political parties, but the malaise goes much deeper than any of those single actions can address. For me, it is a matter of mindset. Politics in this State is smug and involves a sense of entitlement that does not fit into any republican framework.

The legitimate question for the average person on the street hearing this latest chapter in the story of corruption in this State is: what are the consequences for those who have been found guilty of abusing their public office? What will happen? Many of these characters are drawing down extravagant pensions paid for by the taxpayer. What will happen in that regard? If there is to be even the beginnings of trust rebuilt in the system of public administration, at a minimum there must be consequences for former Taoisigh, former Commissioners and former Ministers who clearly abused, and in some cases corruptly abused, their positions of trust.

Sometimes they say plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose; things on the surface change but in reality they remain constant. Politics in this State is dominated essentially by a cadre of men. We have debated gender in this Chamber in respect of the upcoming quota provisions. I do not want to “over-egg” the point but it is fair to say the kind of imbalance in representational terms we have across Irish political life does not help in terms of trying to conquer a culture and a tradition of political corruption.

We have now almost a tradition of political posturing in this House once these tribunal reports are released, and we have heard people on both sides of the House batting to protect, as it were, the honour of their side. That is to entirely miss the point and the gravity of what has happened because it is nothing short of a democratic crisis if citizens believe the public administration not only fails them but that it actively colludes against their interests. The Mahon and Moriarty reports give us concrete examples of where that was certainly the case. If we are to fix that, rhetoric and spin will not be enough. Big political parties batting for their own self-interest, engaging in damage limitation or mud-slinging from one side to the other will not cut it either. We need a fundamental transformation. We need to understand, as a previous speaker stated, that the people own Ireland and that no political party has this State, this country or its citizens in its back pocket.

I am sure most people are disappointed but not surprised by the Mahon tribunal report, but for the people change must happen in that regard also. There may have been a time in this country where stroke politics and the loveable rogue were overlooked because the economy was buoyant and perhaps times were good. There were certainly times in this State when the loveable rogues and the wrong-doing were overlooked out of a culture of fear. Both of those phenomenon now must come to a definitive end. Politics must offer more for citizens. A real Republic must be built and, crucially, the people - the citizens, the taxpayers - must demand no less than that Republic.

It is very difficult to find words which would adequately condemn the type of behaviour outlined in this report, and previous ones, from the planning tribunal. It is a sorry tale of greed and betrayal, evasion and mendacity. It is a story of those elected to public office who had no sense of public duty nor a recognisable moral compass. It is a story of those who perceived public office as an opportunity for self-service rather than public service. While it has to be acknowledged that two Fine Gael councillors were found by Judge Mahon to have received corrupt payments, substantially the story of corruption is a Fianna Fáil story.

To ensure public confidence in our political institutions it is important that no individual uses political office to obtain secret personal financial benefit from third parties in circumstances in which, even if the payment received is not corrupt, there can be any perception of the receipt of such payment undermining his or her capacity to make an independent individual judgment in the area of public affairs or which gives rise to any public perception that his or her capacity to do so has been undermined or in any way contaminated.

To have the honour to be elected to public office brings with it solemn obligations to serve the public interest. The central democratic value in holding electoral office is not only to be free but to be perceived to be free to make decisions in the public interest. In any ordinary meaning of the word it is frankly treasonous to use public office for corrupt gain. It is not only plainly wrong but utterly undermines the credibility of our democratic institutions and breeds widespread cynicism and distrust of those who behave honourably.

I note the speech of the Fianna Fáil leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, yesterday on the Mahon report. I constantly marvel at the utter lack of any sense of shame on the part of Deputy Martin and other Fianna Fáil Members who sat in Cabinet or who provided support from the Fianna Fáil back benches for those people in a leadership position in Fianna Fáil condemned by the report. It is as if they lived in a parallel universe oblivious to the revelations of recent years that received widespread publicity and were known to the dogs in the street well in advance of the publication of the Mahon report. Deputies Martin, Ó Cuív, O'Dea and others, both individually and collectively, stood by those who they now publically claim to condemn. The truth is that, while they are guilty of no personal wrongdoing, the political judgment shown by them in this area during their time in Government is deeply and fundamentally flawed. For Deputies Martin, Ó Cuív, O'Dea and others, whether it be the tribunal revelations or the disastrous economic and fiscal legacy for which they are responsible, there is a complete failure to acknowledge responsibility for either acts or omissions. It is as if the concept of collective Cabinet responsibility never existed. Rather than engaging in his daily knockabout Punch and Judy Show in this House, Deputy Martin would better serve his party and the country if he refrained from asinine headline seeking criticism of action taken by Government to address the enormous difficulties with which the State and our people are confronted as a consequence of failures for which he is collectively responsible from his time in Government. It is extraordinary that it has still not dawned on members of Fianna Fáil that over a 15 year period that party showed such deeply flawed judgment when in office that there is no reason to believe the judgment shown today in opposition is any less flawed.

People are entitled to wonder how many reports must there be before people face up to their responsibilities. The plain truth is that despite fine words of condemnation by some people following earlier reports from the tribunal, there was no genuine recognition that things would have to change nor, it seems now, was there any real intention that they would change. What else could explain what happened subsequently at the tribunal, and the desperate chorus of cynical voices which tried to undermine its work?

It is fundamental to our democracy that it is the people who will decide what the political consequences of this report should be. I will confine myself to the basic point that electing to public office people who have been corrupt or who have failed to deal effectively with and tolerated corruption in their midst merely condemns us to more of this behaviour.

It is a fact the world over that some individuals involved in political life become corrupt and it would be foolish for any party to pretend they are immune from that possibility, but what this report presents is the systemic failure on the part of some to deal rigorously - or truthfully - with the issue of corruption when it emerges. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that one party in particular, rather than face up to the consequences of what had been going on, simply adopted a policy of "don't ask, don't tell" when it came to corruption. In reality it was not so much a case of ignoring the elephant in the living room as patting it on the head amid steadfast expressions of support. This happened not in the distant past, but under the previous Government.

One of my primary responsibilities as Minister for Justice and Equality is to ensure that the criminal justice system is equipped to deal adequately with corruption, whatever its source.

The House will be aware that the Government has already referred this report to the Garda Commissioner. The Commissioner in turn referred the report to the assistant commissioner in charge of the national support services, which include the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation. Specifically, the head of the Criminal Assets Bureau has been asked to lead the examination of the report. I have no doubt that An Garda Síochána will pursue the matters dealt with in the report wherever they lead and without fear or favour. It is true that, to date, the Criminal Assets Bureau has already been successfully engaged in the recovery of funds and assets from some of the individuals referred to in the report.

While it is the case that evidence given before the tribunal cannot be used itself as a basis for a criminal prosecution, it can form a roadmap for the Garda to examine the issues involved. Equally, the fact that the tribunal does not make a finding of what would amount to criminal behaviour against someone does not offer them any immunity if the Garda in its inquiries uncovers evidence of offences of any kind. I hope people co-operate fully with any inquiries which the Garda may undertake, and I expect that in particular those who feel wronged by the report would be happy to co-operate with the Garda in those circumstances.

It would be very foolish for anyone to assume that referring the report to An Garda Síochána is some sort of token exercise. Anyone deluded enough to think that should look at what has happened since earlier reports of the tribunal have been published: people have been convicted and imprisoned, some are awaiting trial and millions of euro have been recovered. Let me say it as plainly as I can: no one who has been involved in corrupt practices should think that the publication of the tribunal's report is an end to the matter.

The tribunal's report contains a number of useful recommendations aimed at strengthening the criminal law. I am able to reassure the House that because since my appointment I have been giving priority to the area of dealing with white collar crime generally, we will be able to address these recommendations quickly and effectively. Criminal law in the area of white collar crime was considerably strengthened by the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 2011 which I introduced earlier in this Government's lifetime. That measure is targeted at specified serious offences, including fraud, corruption and money laundering. As well as providing for whistleblowers' protection, the Act provides for a new offence relating to failure to report information to the Garda which could prevent the commission of white collar crime or which could assist the Garda in carrying out investigations into this area. These powers have already strengthened substantially the powers available to an Garda Síochána to pursue corruption. Last year, I also took steps to ensure that Ireland ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which was signed by the State in 2003. The convention provides a set of standards and rules to encourage countries to strengthen their regimes to fight corruption, and to promote proper management in public affairs and public property.

The tribunal recommends amending the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1889 to cover Oireachtas Members. I propose to repeal all seven Acts making up the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1889 to 2010 and replace them with a single Act which will apply to all persons in the public and private sector, including, of course, Members of both Houses. The tribunal also suggests the exclusion of bribe-givers from public tenders. We should also seriously consider the exclusion from public office of those who accept bribes.

I will also deal in the proposed corruption legislation with other recommendations made by the tribunal in this area. The tribunal has made recommendations in the area of safeguards against money laundering. Work is well under way in the Department on amending the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act) 2010 and we are looking at how the relevant recommendations of the tribunal can be best reflected in the legislation which is being prepared.

A number of the recommendations relate to asset confiscation and forfeiture. I previously informed the House that the operation of the proceeds of crime legislation is being reviewed by officials in the Department in consultation with the Criminal Assets Bureau and the Office of the Attorney General. The relevant provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 1994 are also being reviewed in the light of a European Commission proposal to reform the law on confiscation and asset recovery.

The report also contains recommendations about changes in the legislation governing the operation of tribunals. It is no criticism of the valuable work which had been done by Judge Mahon and his colleagues to repeat the general concern that tribunals of inquiry can take too long and cost too much to establish the truth. We had proposals for a greater role for the Oireachtas in carrying out inquiries which, in the event, did not find favour with the people in a referendum last autumn. We all need to reflect again on this whole area.

Specifically on tribunals legislation, I point to the fact that the previous Government published a Tribunals of Inquiry Bill in 2005 but for whatever reason left it languishing on the Dáil Order Paper. I have arranged for its restoration to the Dáil Order Paper and the Bill will be dealt with on Report Stage. We will address the specific recommendations made by the tribunal in that context.

I want to return briefly to the issue of corruption. The report states:

While traditionally corruption has been viewed as an issue of individual morality, in recent years, advances in understanding both its causes and its consequences mean that it is now also viewed as a problem of systemic failure. In other words, where an individual behaves corruptly, then the problem lies as much with the system which permitted or failed to prevent that behaviour as with that individual.

In recent years the concept of "systemic failure" has become the excuse for a variety of difficulties that have arisen and all too frequently it has been used to evade the concepts of accountability and personal responsibility. While clearly many reforms have been recommended that would create an architecture designed to remove the incentives and opportunity for corruption and to provide for greater transparency, I do not accept there is an equivalence between systemic imperfections and individual corruption. Central to the issue of individual corruption are issues of individual morality, ethical standards and responsibility. While the report disclosed corruption and poor judgment by some, it should not be forgotten that many others who held public office within the then imperfect system were not corrupt, did not make poor judgments and were not financially seduced. A concept of equivalence should not be used to explain or understand corrupt practices by those who should have behaved differently.

It would be a great tragedy if the corrupt behaviour of some public representatives acts to tarnish the good name of many who set out to serve the people honestly and to the best of their ability. It is against this background that it is so important that we have in place laws which defend us all - the public and public representatives alike - from corrupt practices. I hope I have been able to make clear today that I am determined as Minister for Justice and Equality to do everything I can to make sure this is so.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Final Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments. Most, if not all, speakers have welcomed the publication of the report. I hope people will understand that I wish to deal with the specific aspect of the final report which refers to me in my capacity as the former financial controller of the Fianna Fáil Party.

Last Thursday evening after the publication of the report I issued a press release which stated:

The tribunal report, most probably inadvertently, implied that I, in my capacity as former Financial Controller of Fianna Fáil, was aware of the IR£50,000 payment to Mr. Pádraig Flynn by Mr. Tom Gilmartin. This is simply not the case.

There was no suggestion at any time at the tribunal or at public session that I was aware of Mr. Flynn's involvement in this matter. It is also clear from the tribunal's own findings issued today that while other people were made aware of Mr. Flynn's involvement, there is no suggestion that I had any knowledge on this matter.

However since an incorrect statement has been made against me which has significant consequences for me as a serving politician and Chartered Accountant I believe and hope that the tribunal will move to correct this small but significant error.

Arising from this I then wrote to the tribunal on Friday, 23 March, and addressed my correspondence to Ms Susan Gilvarry, Solicitor, The Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments, Upper Castle Yard, Dublin Castle, Dublin 2. The letter stated:

Re: The Final Report.

Dear Ms. Gilvarry,

I am writing to you in respect of the Final Report published yesterday by the Tribunal Judges.

At page 2,460 of the Report (Chapter 17) the Report reaches the following finding in respect of the knowledge within Fianna Fáil of Mr. Tom Gilmartin's payment of £50,000 to Mr. Pádraig Flynn. At paragraph 6 on page 2,460 the Tribunal reports:

"Neither Mr. Ahern, nor Mr. Reynolds, nor Mr. Sherwin, nor Mr. Kavanagh, nor Mr. Fleming contacted Mr. Flynn in relation to Mr. Gilmartin's payment of IR£50,000 at any time prior to the establishment of this Tribunal".

This finding is a negative finding against me because it asserts that I had knowledge that Mr. Gilmartin had paid IR£50,000 to Mr. Flynn and did nothing about it. I think this finding is clearly an error since, as the Tribunal will be aware, at no stage was there ever any evidence before the Tribunal that I, as Financial Controller of Fianna Fáil in 1990, had been informed that the IR£50,000 payment made by Mr. Gilmartin had been made to Mr. Flynn.

The Tribunal will be aware that the reason I became involved in this part of the Inquiry was because Mr. Paul Kavanagh [the party fund-raiser] gave evidence that, in order to determine whether Mr. Gilmartin had in fact made a payment of £50,000, he had contacted me as Financial Controller in order to see whether there was a record of any such donation within Fianna Fáil.

At no stage did Mr. Kavanagh suggest to the Tribunal, nor was there ever any evidence before the Tribunal that I had been informed by Mr. Kavanagh or anyone else that the £50,000 payment made by Mr. Gilmartin had been made to Mr. Flynn.

On 30 June 2004, day 501 of the public sittings of the tribunal I gave evidence in the following terms.

Q.104 Did Mr. Kavanagh inform you of any potential involvement by Mr. Padraig Flynn in this payment?

A. Certainly not because I had no knowledge of Padraig Flynn's involvement until it became public in recent years.

Q. So you reverted to Mr. Kavanagh and told him that the books and records show no such payment had [in] fact been paid?

A. Yes.

Q. Is that everything that you did?

A. That's the beginning and end of it."

I was then questioned quite intensively by Counsel for the Tribunal about the query raised with me by Mr. Kavanagh. However, at no stage was it ever suggested to me that I had been made aware that Mr. Gilmartin had informed others within Fianna Fáil that the donation had been made to Mr. Flynn. In fact, it was expressly recognised by Counsel for the Tribunal in her questioning No. 130, page 53, were she stated:

"Q.130 If you had become aware at the time in 1990 that £50,000 had been destined for Fianna Fail, had not arrived, and had remained with Mr. Flynn, what steps would you have taken?

A. No this is a hypothetical situation. I make it clear in my statement, I had no knowledge of Mr. Flynn's involvement at that time.

Q. I said if?' (Emphasis Added)

[It is clear she was putting this to me as a hypothetical situation.]

As a serving member of Dáil Éireann and chartered accountant, I have been subjected to considerable criticism and adverse comment because of this negative finding against me in the tribunal's final report. Already on the airwaves and in public discourse I have been criticised for my failure to contact Mr. Flynn in relation to the payment of £50,000 by Mr. Gilmartin. I never knew that the donation I was asked to check for was a donation that was made through Mr. Flynn. No one ever mentioned that to me, as is clear from the evidence given to the tribunal.

I think the finding of the tribunal is clearly incorrect and I would simply ask that the tribunal would write me a letter recognising that the finding against me in paragraph 6 on page 2,460 is an error. I would greatly appreciate it the tribunal could seek to rectify this matter as best it can as otherwise it will continue to result in significant reputational damage to me which is undeserved.

I look forward to hearing back from you.

Yours sincerely,

Sean Fleming.

I received a reply from the tribunal yesterday, dated 26 March. It states:

Dear Mr. Fleming,

I refer to the above and to your letter of the 23rd March received 26th March, 2012.

I confirm that I am directed by the Chairman of the Tribunal to respond to you regarding your correspondence.

The Chairman has indicated that his co-Tribunal Members, Her Honour Judge Mary Faherty and his Honour Judge Gerard Keys, have this week been assigned to Court duties.

Accordingly, they are not available to the Chairman of the Tribunal at this time for the purpose of discussing the matters set out in your correspondence.

Arrangements will be made later in the week or early next week for the Tribunal Members to meet to discuss the concerns set out in your correspondence and I will revert to you at that time.

I trust this is in order.

Yours sincerely,

Susan Gilvarry,

Solicitor to the Tribunal.

By way of context, I have a proven track record in situations where I believe a donation to the Fianna Fáil Party was not transmitted to Fianna Fáil head office. I refer specifically to the Fitzwilton Rennicks donation to Fianna Fáil through former Minister and Deputy, Ray Burke. On 8 June 1989 Ray Burke handed a bank draft for £10,000 to Paul Kavanagh, party fund-raiser and myself in respect of the above company. I was not satisfied that £10,000 was the full amount of the contribution. Both of us confronted Ray Burke directly on the matter. We then spoke to the then party leader, the late Charles Haughey, and informed him that the party nationally was left short changed in respect of this donation.

On 1 July 1998, I made a statement in the Dáil highlighting the full details of this matter. I sent a copy of this statement to the planning tribunal the following morning. On 28 October 1998, I met with the tribunal legal team in private session on the matter. I also met with detectives from the Criminal Assets Bureau in late 2003 and assisted them in their inquiries in relation to Ray Burke. The record is clear and shows that I always pursue matters of this nature. This is a clear example that when I have knowledge of an issue I do follow it up. I have also stated that there is an error in relation to the findings against me because it asserts I had knowledge of Mr. Flynn's involvement in the matter. This is not true.

Previous speakers in this debate accepted in full the findings of this report. The finding with which I am concerned is finding No. 6 on page 2,460. Unfortunately for me, pending a correction I am included in that finding. A previous speaker in this debate relying on this finding stated that there is no excuse for the failure to confront Mr. Flynn with this allegation at the time and that there is no doubt that it formed part of the political culture which ignored or dismissed allegations of corruption rather than properly investigating them. In the same way that I cannot accept the tribunal's findings against me, as it is an error, I cannot accept the veracity of the above comments by a previous speaker. I reject that I failed to confront Mr. Flynn as it implies I had knowledge of his involvement, which is simply not the case. In the reference to the so-called "political culture" it must also be made clear that it is incorrect to implicate me by association with this. I will also be seeking to have this matter rectified.

I look forward to the tribunal recognising that its finding against me is an error and ask those who have accepted and relied on that finding and have compounded the error in this House also to recognise their mistakes.

The next speaker is Deputy Áine Collins, whom I understand is sharing time with Deputy Mulherin.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Mahon tribunal report which has confirmed what many people have believed for a long time, namely, there has been corruption throughout our political system from the top to the bottom, which affected every level of Irish society. It does not reflect well on our country that the people who had the most power were corrupt. It also does not reflect well on politics or politicians. It does not reflect well on our society that this corruption was, as stated in the Mahon report "widely known and widely tolerated". People's trust in our political system and in politicians is badly damaged. I will not go into the "who did what" as we have all read and heard enough about that in recent days.

It is shocking that it took 15 years for us to be told something that everybody knew. The question that must now be asked is: was it worth it? Completion of the inquiry took 15 years and cost more than €300 million, and the report of which runs to 3,250 pages. The sum of €300 million is a lot of money. How many nursing hours, cystic fibrosis units and schools could have been provided, built or upgraded with that money? How many businesses could have been supported to create the many jobs now needed? Was it worth it? If will only have been worth it if we learn from it. We must make changes to our political systems, society and attitudes. We cannot tolerate this type of behaviour in future. We must implement the Mahon tribunal's recommendations with immediate effect.

We teach our children from an early age that lying is not acceptable, yet we are told nothing but lies and half-truths were told to the Mahon tribunal, which is appalling, particularly when those lies and half truths came from someone who held the highest office in the land, which position should mean something. It meant a lot to me to be elected in the 2011 general election. For me, it meant the people in Cork North-West trusted me to represent them. It will take some time before people will again trust politicians.

All of us in this House have a responsibility to try to repair the damage that has been done and to ensure this never happens again. Many other Members of this House who, like me, were not previously politicians have all now been tarnished by what has happened. It is imperative that we implement the recommendations of the Mahon report. We need tighter rules on political donations and more transparency.

Politicians and other officeholders who are found to be corrupt must be taken to task for their actions. We must address the issue of pension payments for politicians and public representatives. I welcome that the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, intends to legislate to ensure this behaviour will never again be tolerated by politicians or public representatives.

I too welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the final report of the Mahon tribunal. The findings of the Mahon tribunal highlight an old attitude within the life of the past Government and Fianna Fáil in general. The excesses that characterised the politics of the day is best compared to what is witnessed in the Third World, namely, politics of arrogance, impunity and cults of personality - anything but principles and accountability. We are told that when salt loses its saltiness it becomes worthless. This best encapsulates what has happened here to the politicians involved. When a politician forgets his or her mandate to those whom they have undertaken to serve, they become something else altogether - an abomination of the very essence of what a democratically elected politician in a republic should be. That is not news, nor is it what I stood up to point out.

It has been suggested by the Fianna Fáil Party that it should be judged by how it deals with the findings of the Mahon tribunal report and nothing else. The report describes a corrupt political culture that was incubated and cultivated by Fianna Fáil as the leading popular force in Irish politics over those years. It affected planning and brought this country to its knees. In the dying days of the last Government, Fianna Fáil was concerned not with the presence of the IMF or the difficulties faced by this country, but with how the Fianna Fáil organisation could be salvaged.

What Fianna Fáil does as a party in the wake of these revelations will say even more about that party's underlying philosophy. It is noteworthy that some of those closest to Bertie Ahern, who made their political careers in the shadow of his popularity, have been among the first to throw stones at him. The popularity of a leader involves more than the leader himself - it involves those with him and under him. We are the first to say no one is perfect. It is precisely because this is politics, rather than religion, that we can and must demand high standards of those who put their names on the ballot paper and are elected on the basis of what they promise. At one point in time, the politicians dealt with in this report claimed to be the best people for the job. They said they would work in the best interests of the people. Sadly, the findings of the Mahon report confirm they were involved in the absolute abuse of the ultimate political power and authority in this country. People have been badly let down.

The tribunal criticised Ministers who sought to undermine its work. It should be recalled that it was more than just criticism. In mid-November 2007, the previous Government sought to reintroduce a Bill that would have provided for the closure of tribunals. Not only did the judges have to listen to such criticism, but they also had to live with the real threat that the Government would close down the Mahon tribunal. Deputy Martin mentioned that the report did not name specific Ministers, but that is beside the point. The previous Government, supported by its public relations machine and its spin doctors, was collectively responsible for a sustained campaign of criticism and vilification of the tribunal. The aim of that campaign was to undermine the credibility of the tribunal and to defend the then Taoiseach, whose evidence was becoming more incredible each day.

We know that Fianna Fáil is grasping at straws at this point. It would like to assert that this conduct is generally continuing. It has even dragged the Taoiseach into it by suggesting he is part of this mindset or operation in some way simply because he once appeared on a platform with a certain individual. As a constituency colleague of the Taoiseach, I assure the House that this country is lucky to have Deputy Kenny as its Taoiseach. He cannot be accused of corruption or abuse. As he travels to represent Ireland abroad, we can draw comfort from the fact that no accusation of abuse of power can be levelled against him. This country cannot be revealed as a laughing stock because its current Taoiseach is operating only from a perspective of self-interest and greed, as the Mahon tribunal report revealed in the case of a former Taoiseach.

Many people are concerned that this tribunal cost over €300 million and took 15 years to conclude its business. They are keen to know what action will be taken on foot of it, given that there is a poor precedent for people to be brought to justice after tribunal findings are made against them. They can take consolation from the hope that criminal prosecutions will ensue in this instance and the Revenue Commissioners will take their just desserts from the people involved in this. People feel it most when they are hit in their pockets. The Minister, rather than the ordinary Deputy, is the person with the power. It is absolutely abhorrent for a Minister to abuse his power. A mechanism should be found in any way that is possible to remove pensions from those named in this report who receive those pensions by virtue of an office they formerly held. Just as we require justice to be administered, carried out and achieved in the banking system, we have a need to see some justice arising from this report.

The amount of money that has been spent on this process and the length of time it took are very much on people's minds. We need to revisit the proposal to give power to Oireachtas committees. People were misled when they voted against it in last year's referendum. Many people in the legal profession can take responsibility for that. Surely we can find facts without it costing the Exchequer hundreds of millions of euro. A mechanism other than a tribunal has to be found. It is regrettable that Oireachtas committees cannot inquire into the banking situation because last year's referendum did not pass. We are still in limbo. I hope we can examine the matter again to ascertain whether another avenue is available. We need to achieve transparency and find facts in a more expedient and economically efficient manner.

Given that much of this report has been in the public domain for a long time, I find the level of outrage in the last week a bit odd. I do not think Fianna Fáil can stand over its lack of knowledge of what prevailed during its time in office. I find it hard to take the media's outrage about what it has just learned. When the people had their chance to speak 12 months ago, they unceremoniously dumped Fianna Fáil and the Green Party out of office. They had enough. One would have thought the people would have had enough of Fianna Fáil by 2007 but sadly, the media played a part in sustaining it in the run-up to the election of that year. When evidence that Bertie Ahern had given to the Mahon tribunal was leaked to the media in advance of the 2007 election, a number of columnists in the Sunday Independent launched an attack on those newspapers and media outlets that had published and reported on the extracts from the Mahon tribunal. One columnist, Eoghan Harris, who was later nominated to the Seanad by Bertie Ahern, wrote:

For the first time in my life I am going to vote Fianna Fáil. And if you care about the future of Irish democracy you will do the same. Because I believe the anti-Ahern campaign to be the most sinister, sustained and successful manipulation of the Irish media that I have seen in my lifetime.

Those were strong words. Eoghan Harris accused the rest of the Irish media of being gullible. He argued that "the Taoiseach is the object of two orchestrated campaigns", one led by The Irish Times and the other being a “Sinn Féin/IRA campaign”. He suggested that if the latter campaign succeeded, it would “take down the most brilliant Taoiseach of modern times”. Eoghan Harris also criticised Vincent Browne, who pressed Bertie Ahern intensively on his personal finances at the launch of the 2007 Fianna Fáil election manifesto.

The relationship between politics and big business has been at the heart of a serious problem we have had in Ireland for a long time. Sadly, money has the power to separate the electorate from the Legislature. The Legislature is dominated by the ruling party, which is often financed by big business. The more money one has, the more likely one is to have a greater say in how things are done at Government level. The best example of this is found in America, where it costs several hundred million to run for election. The arms industry is one of the biggest contributors to the political system there. As one might expect, if one wants to win a presidential election in America, one will have to be fairly keen on the use of plenty of arms and bombs in order to ensure the arms industry thrives. Despite President Barack Obama's promises to deal with the war in Afghanistan and his suggestion that it was mad, there has been an increase in the number of troops in that country since his election.

However, given that he got so much money from the arms industry, I am sure his hands are tied.

Speaking of big business, I am surprised at how tolerant Fine Gael has been of certain big business people, including Mr. Denis O'Brien. The latter was strongly criticised by the Mahon tribunal, yet he was at the Global Irish Economic Forum. That was not a great idea. I was also surprised to see Mr. O'Brien in New York at the opening of the stock exchange last week. The Taoiseach said he had no say in the line-up but I am sure that had President al-Assad been in the line-up, he might have had some objections. What occurred is not good enough. When Deputy Joe Higgins challenged the Tánaiste yesterday in the House on the presence of Mr. O'Brien in New York, the Tánaiste replied that what ultimately matters is that we get our economy to recover. There is no doubt that we would like the economy to recover but I would not like to believe it will be at any price.

A serious lack of trust in politicians has developed among the people over the years. Unkept promises by Governments do not help matters. The Government, before it got elected, was very keen to tell everybody how it would deal with bondholders but it has not really lived up to its promise in that regard. With regard to the household charge, it was as late as January 2011 that the Government told the people the household charge was grossly unfair on the unemployed, pensioners and those who have already paid too much tax on the purchase of their overpriced houses.

The over-centralised nature of politics and the lack of real self-government and citizen participation have been at the heart of many of our problems. One must examine how decisions are made. Too many decisions are made at the centre at present and we are not nearly democratic enough. County managers have an executive role at local government level. For all practical purposes, with the exception of deciding on the rezoning of land, the county or city manager makes all the decisions. This is a huge problem because one does not know whether a manager is good. The people in local authority areas do not have nearly strong enough a say. They have so little control over their governance. That our system is becoming overly centralised is very frustrating for them.

It was interesting to read some of the recommendations in the Mahon tribunal's report. It is stated that the National Transport Authority has an impact on planning as it plays a role in adopting regional planning guidelines and has several functions which have direct implications for planning and development but that members are appointed by the centre, namely the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government. The Mahon report recommends that they should in future be appointed by an independent appointments board, thus removing power from the centre.

The tribunal also recommended that the power of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to give directions to regional authorities and local planning authorities be entrusted to an independent planning regulator. Concern is expressed over recent changes in the planning system that have resulted in the over-centralisation of power to the hands of the Minister.

We will not have a fair society unless we seriously address many of the problems that arise. Seemingly, some corruption is legal. We have seen much corruption in the banking system in the awarding of public contracts, and we have seen it in the control of planning. One could argue a legal form of corruption is the paying of unsecured bondholders. The poor distribution of wealth in the country has left so much to be desired.

There is no doubt but that we have a divided and unfair society. Greater emphasis should be placed on the education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, such that he would attempt to develop in himself a sense of responsibility for his fellow man in place of the glorification of power and success. At the root of many of our problems is our bowing to power and money all the time.

Last week in Britain, the Conservative Party's chief fund-raiser, Mr. Peter Cruddas, claimed donors giving more than £250,000 to the party could have their voices heard in respect of the British Government's policies. I am afraid we have an exaggerated version of that. If the new Irish Government is really serious about proceeding differently, its first step should be to engage citizens in the organisation of society. We need real local government reform so the citizen will be an active participant in the running of the country and in determining how his life and community are affected. This model would contrast with the tokenistic one that pertains at present whereby, to all intents and purposes, we have no local government and the people have no representation.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this very important debate, which is possibly a watershed in Irish politics. Despite the newness of this State, we have unfortunately seen corruption extending to the core of our democratic system that has affected the very credibility and integrity not only of the politicians named in the Mahon tribunal report but also of every other elected public representative. Doubts have been cast over public representatives' character and role. It is very disappointing, as a new Deputy, to read such a report at this time.

As with many citizens, I am annoyed and frustrated over the time it has taken for the tribunal to conclude its investigation and the cost. Would it be better to have an Oireachtas oversight system with real powers of investigation that would be more responsive and efficient and give better service to citizens?

The damage to the body politic and representational democracy cannot be overestimated. The Deputies in the Chamber are all new except Deputies McHugh and Michael McGrath. I have always had the greatest of respect for any person who puts his name on a ballot paper in the public interest. Perhaps I have been naïve to some extent because, with the Mahon tribunal, I have seen that the cancer of corruption extended to all levels, including ministerial level. This is a sad indictment of our system.

Deputy Michael McGrath is a relatively new member of Fianna Fáil. I do not doubt his integrity and credibility in any way but, unfortunately, he has been left a dire and devastating legacy by those who went before him. I am not being patronising in saying so because people in Fine Gael have been questioned also. It behoves all of us to purge the system and root out those who are doing down the democratic system for which our forefathers fought so much. I have no doubt they would turn in their graves if they saw the carry-on of recent years.

As a Fine Gael Deputy, I must state I have many good friends in various organisations such as the GAA and on parish committees and boards of management who are active Fianna Fáil supporters. They tell me so quite openly. I can see in them a sense of disillusionment, betrayal, frustration and let-down. I feel sorry for them because they did not engage with the democratic process in order to see these types of outcomes. They have been let down by the people they have worked for and for whom they fought election campaigns. That is most disappointing to see also.

Fianna Fáil must look closely at the legacy it has left the country. It has not just left us with a devastating economic legacy but, more important, it has left us a damaged democratic system with questions hanging over the political system's credibility and integrity.

I do not like the aspersions being cast that our Taoiseach may have question marks over him too, as Deputy Wallace alluded to earlier. Mud is thrown at our Taoiseach because Denis O'Brien appeared near him recently when opening the trading day at the New York Stock Exchange. Denis O'Brien was invited not by the Taoiseach or the Government but the New York Stock Exchange to that event. I say to Deputy Wallace and other Members who might try to cast some aspersions, the Taoiseach is the longest serving Member of the Dáil and has also served on local authorities. There is not one bit of dirt on him. If there were, it would have been dug up a long time ago. The Taoiseach is a man of integrity whose reputation is held in great esteem. He, along with the Government, will restore our international reputation.

It also amazes me to hear Sinn Féin take the moral high ground in cases such as this. I will not let Sinn Féin forget that it had recent and close links to paramilitary organisations involved in subversive activities, money laundering, racketeering and other damaging actions to our fundamental democratic institutions. Sinn Féin will not lecture Fine Gael or take the moral high ground on democratic representation.

What lessons can be learned from the Mahon report? We must certainly look at reforming the planning system. Was corruption only happening in Dublin or was it in other areas too? We need a more transparent and accountable oversight system for planning. It is not just about councillors but also officials who have significant and abundant powers when it comes to planning and zoning.

Some improvements have been made in this regard with the declarations of interest to the Standards in Public Office Commission which is obligatory for public representatives and senior officials. The commission needs to be strengthened more. I referred earlier to strengthening the powers of investigation for Oireachtas committees. They should have the power to call before them senior planning officials, county and city managers and councillors as well as other individuals as they see fit and appropriate. The Standards in Public Office Commission needs to have its powers strengthened too. The former Senator, Eugene Regan, made a complaint to the commission about the goings-on of Bertie Ahern and the large amounts of cash flowing in and out of his office. I cannot say out of his bank accounts because he said he had none. At the time the commission could not pursue the matter until Revenue had made a determination. There is a weakness in our system when the Standards in Public Office Commission needs to be strengthened and empowered to follow up on such complaints when they are made.

I am glad the matters raised in the report have been referred to the Revenue, the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, and other relevant authorities. As a democratically mandated and elected representative, I expect follow-up and results, as do our citizens.

Some Deputies referred to the links between politics and business. We must provide for legitimate engagement where genuine businesspeople or citizens want to support political parties of any hue but which must have proper oversight. For that reason, I welcome the new limits on donations to political parties. The people must decide, however, whether political parties are funded from private donations or from the Exchequer. This is a question that goes to the very heart of our democracy. If parties are funded from the Exchequer, the citizens will pay for it. What is the Opposition's view on this? As we have heard lately, most Opposition Members will criticise any additional expenditure on the Exchequer to try to keep our country going in the present devastating economic circumstances.

A register of lobbyists, like those in other countries, should be established. I would have no difficulty with such a register. It is natural in our job as politicians to be lobbied by various agencies and individuals on legislation and other matters that affect our citizens. What harm would it do if we kept a proper register of lobbyists which would record the matters on which they lobbied Deputies and councillors? This would restore some credibility and integrity to our system.

It does not give me any great pleasure to criticise any public representative. As I have stated already, I admire anyone from any party and none who puts his or her name on a ballot paper. The former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, the former Minister, Pádraig Flynn, and many others have done this State and democratic politics a disservice. They should hang their heads in shame. I hope the relevant authorities will pursue them and appropriate action will be taken. For the future of this country, our children and politics, as well as the need to restore the political syste's credibility, we must purge this type of activity from it.

I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution to the debate on the Mahon tribunal or as it is formally known, the Final Report of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments.

While many people suspected endemic corruption in our planning system during the years under scrutiny by this tribunal, and perhaps even to this day, it was nonetheless shocking for the full nature and extent of it to be laid bare in this final report of the tribunal. It is riveting if depressing reading. It upsets me greatly that elected persons, entrusted by ordinary people, would betray that trust and use their privileged position to enrich themselves and those around them. The Mahon tribunal has done the State considerable service by shining a light on corrupt behaviour in our democratic institutions. For that alone, it was worthwhile. The debate about the cost and length of the tribunal is a legitimate one but for another day.

Given that this report dealt solely with planning matters in Dublin, it is inevitable questions will arise as to whether the same practices and the same standards prevailed elsewhere in the country. I can only speak from my experience as a town and county councillor in County Cork. I have never witnessed corruption and I have not known of anyone to accept a bribe. We would be naive to think, however, that the temptation of easy money in return for political favours did not exist elsewhere. Of course it did and it was not resisted by all. For that reason alone, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, should reinstate the inquiries into the six local authority areas in the manner originally constituted by the previous Government. I know that those inquiries were not dealing with allegations of corruption but changing them from independent, external inquiries to in-house inquiries was the wrong decision and should be changed.

While the report of the tribunal deals with public representatives from several parties, my party, Fianna Fáil lies at the heart of it. That is the harsh reality our leader Deputy Martin, I and my colleagues have had to face up to in recent days. The revelations concerning some former Fianna Fáil public representatives are deplorable. As a young public representative and as someone in politics for the right reasons, I am embarrassed and saddened by the actions of some of those who used the Fianna Fáil label as a vehicle for corrupt personal benefit.

It also saddens me that Bertie Ahern who led our party for 14 years and served as Taoiseach for three terms, a man of considerable achievements, was found not to have given truthful accounts to a tribunal of inquiry established by this House. This is a most serious finding. That is why we as a party have acted decisively since the report was published less than a week ago.

People who have been guilty of any wrongdoing now need to face up to the consequences of their actions. The full rigours of the law must to be applied. There will simply have to be consequences for the people concerned. Page 2,649 of the Mahon report recommends the Prevention of Corruption Act 1889 be extended to cover Oireachtas Members. This change would effectively allow for the politicians found to have been bribed to lose their pensions. The Government must act to immediately implement this recommendation and to examine other ways of updating and strengthening this legislation dealing with politicians found guilty of corruption.

Apart from the obvious public disgrace faced by politicians who have been bribed, there also must be a financial penalty. It is not acceptable that politicians who have been found to have disgracefully abused public office to enrich themselves would continue to receive lucrative pensions from the taxpayer. It will not be possible to rebuild public confidence in politics until ordinary people see there are consequences for politicians who act in this way.

The Fianna Fáil of 2012 is a different party from the Fianna Fáil of previous years. I am not just referring to the obvious difference in size following last year's emphatic general election defeat. There is no place in our party today for people who seek to abuse their positions. We have a long road to travel to rebuild trust with the Irish people. The only way my party can recover is to accept in full all of the past failings and to renew ourselves based on the basic principles of honesty and integrity in everything we do in public life.

I know in my heart that the actions of these politicians do not reflect the character of the members of our party throughout the country nor of the majority of the party's former and current elected members. As a party, we will not allow the actions of a small number of selfish people, some of whom have been found to be corrupt, to hijack our 86-year history, which includes so many notable achievements for the country.

The overwhelming majority of people who have been elected for Fianna Fáil, including those who have served in high office, were honourable and never had their personal integrity called into question. They must be remembered. I do not need to look as far back as Jack Lynch, Seán Lemass or so many others from that generation for inspiration. I can point to honourable people from Fianna Fáil who served this country without a hint of impropriety in recent years, for example, Dr. Rory O'Hanlon, Dr. Michael Woods, the late Brian Lenihan and many others. The qualities they demonstrated in their public duties embody the true spirit of the party.

In time, we will permanently and resolutely detach from Fianna Fáil the stench of corruption that a small number of disgraced former members brought upon us. On issues of ethics, transparency and accountability in our political and financial affairs, we need to go further than other parties to demonstrate our good faith. We will do so. The manner in which we have responded to the tribunal's report is but one small step on that journey.

Public confidence in all things political ebbed away in recent years as tales of corruption emerged, and not just from this report. The truth is that many people believe that most or even all politicians are on the take or are at least only in it for themselves. Everyone who is elected knows this is not true.

We must be honest and admit that the issues that flow through the Mahon tribunal report are far broader than those pertaining to Fianna Fáil. They run to the core of Ireland's political system and political culture. Other parties, in particular Fine Gael, will need to deal with the serious issues that the Mahon report raises for them. Can we really look into our hearts and say politics in this country has changed? There have been great strides in terms of ethics legislation and the regulations governing the funding of political parties and individual politicians. Many of those strides occurred under Fianna Fail. However, my sense is that we have a long distance to travel yet.

Fianna Fáil will do what it must to face up to its challenges, but there are some uncomfortable questions for the parties currently holding the reigns of power. Consider the pattern of big business fund-raising in Fine Gael as highlighted by the Moriarty tribunal. Is there any evidence that the party's reliance on financial support from the corporate sector has changed? Consider the pattern of appointments to public bodies since the Government entered office. Many still appear to be motivated by political patronage. Persons who have been appointed to prestigious public positions are known to have made substantial donations to the Ministers who subsequently appointed them.

Why do all political parties not publish their accounts in full to remove any suspicion that money is still buying political influence? As a body politic, we should go the distance and introduce the maximum possible level of transparency to all aspects of the funding of political parties. The temptations that those exposed in the Mahon and previous tribunals could not resist will inevitably offer themselves to those who find themselves in power. Undoubtedly, the long number of years for which Fianna Fáil was in power contributed to the abandonment of standards among some. Fine Gael, as the largest party in the country and one that could well be in power for many years to come, would do well to remember the following quotation from Lord Acton: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." We need to ensure that controls are put in place so that power, even a prolonged period in power, does not corrupt anyone. This is a collective responsibility, not just one for those in government. I am glad to have had the opportunity to put these points on the record in the wake of the publication of the Mahon report.

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Mahon report. I spoke with a young man from Los Angeles today who was working as an intern in the Houses. When I asked him for his observations, he replied that matters seemed to be a bit of a mess. This outside observation is unfortunate, as is the position in which we as a body politic have found ourselves.

I agree with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Michael McGrath, in that we have a job to do as a collective body politic to gain the trust and confidence of the electorate. This is never an easy task. One need only look a few miles up the road to Northern Ireland, where a recent survey carried out by Queen's University showed that two thirds of those interviewed believed the planning system failed to uphold the public interest. Planning policy in that jurisdiction is very centralised. There is also a greater detachment between politicians and the planning process than is the case in the Republic. However, the mistrust remains. This is the challenge facing us.

From reading through the legalistic definitions of bribery and corruption, definitively proving either was difficult for the Mahon tribunal. The question is open to legal interpretation and differing opinions. Given the adage that past performance is always a good indicator of future performance, we must challenge the mindset of the past and view these findings as a motivation to change and to put in place a more robust, open and transparent planning process. This would ensure a rich dividend in terms of the trust placed in the body politic by the electorate.

The Mahon tribunal should have acknowledged a change that has occurred in the past 15 years, in that the planning process has become more open and transparent. When I entered politics in 1999, the process was less transparent. Donegal County Council introduced a geographic information system, GIS, for mapping purposes. This technology provided the public with a more open and transparent means of tracking planning applications from start to finish. Changes such as this must continue and I acknowledge that the Mahon tribunal report makes proposals and recommendations to this effect. Many of them should be considered by each local authority.

We must consider current applications in light of the need to develop a robust policy in terms of the national spatial strategy, the national development plan, local development plans and regional planning guidelines.

Different policy arenas have developed into a more open and transparent system since the establishment of the Mahon tribunal 15 years ago but I do not think they go far enough. We have to use technology and the experience gained from our mistakes to build a more robust planning system.

Over the past 15 years, 25,000 planning applications went through the system in County Donegal. Were they all open and transparent and did they undergo a legitimately rigid process? People will have their own opinions on that question. The Taoiseach has asked the Revenue Commissioners and the DPP to deal with the past transgressions set out in the report. It is important that we work towards a more open and transparent system by engaging the administration team in Donegal County Council, which is involved in a number of policy areas.

While regional planning guidelines are effective, the report recommends that representatives be elected at a regional level. A discussion is needed on this proposal for several reasons. We do not want to create a second tier of democracy when we already have representatives providing an input at local level. We should carry out a comprehensive analysis to ensure regional planning guidelines include Border issues. The North-South dynamic is positive at present and we are developing synergies in education, roads and health. We should also aspire to more effective structures at regional level that could incorporate the work being done on an ad hoc basis. There is potential for the development of urban conglomerates such as the city of Derry, the sprawl of which impacts on the east of County Donegal. We have to deal with urban sprawl at a policy level. The vision of the Good Friday Agreement was to develop integrated strategies for planning as well as the marine, education, health, roads and agriculture.

Members of this House have a collective job to do but we should also acknowledge the changing role played by county council members over the past 15 years. They have engaged in more robust debate and consultation on planning policy.

There is no point in drafting a development plan if we do not adhere to it. The consultation process for development plans must be more robust at community level. I know from being involved in the consultation process since 2000 that while planners tried to engage the public, sometimes the process turned into an opportunity for people to complain about historic planning applications or mistakes made in the past. If we are to empower communities in planning and restore trust at local level, we have to develop an action plan or mechanism which allow community ownership of the collective aspirations of an area. Nobody has a greater insight into the needs of an area than members of the community. If we want to implement the report's recommendations on openness and transparency, we have to roll up our sleeves and start consulting our communities on more than a tokenistic basis. We have to ask them what is best for their areas. The depopulation of rural areas means that schools are faced with the loss of teachers. That is a result of not involving local communities in the consultation process.

The report of the Mahon tribunal is a terrible indictment of the way in which politics was conducted in this State for decades. A former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, has been disgraced and resigned from the party that he led to record electoral success. A former senior Minister and EU Commissioner, Pádraig Flynn, has been exposed as corrupt and also left the party in which for many years he strutted the Irish and European stages. Councillors, lobbyists and developers were shown to be deeply involved in corruption of the planning process and the politics. The revelations about planning corruption in County Dublin, especially by Fianna Fáil but also involving Fine Gael, over the past 15 years have been confirmed. People have not been surprised but they are no less appalled by what was done.

I want to refute some of the assertions that have been made in commentary about this report. I reject the notion being peddled in certain quarters that somehow the Irish people in general and all of us in political life are to blame because we tolerated or turned a blind eye to corruption. That is false. I believe that the majority of public representatives of all parties are not personally corrupt and their role in political life is above reproach. The vast majority of citizens are totally opposed to corruption as a blight on our country and would do all in their power to remove it. However, they felt powerless to remove it because the institutions of the State that were supposed to be the watchdogs acting on their behalf failed miserably.

A survey of the range and depth of the findings of the tribunal and the number of persons involved causes one to ask where was the Garda. The answer is given in the findings of the report under the heading "The 1989/90 Garda Corruption Inquiry". This section has not received the attention it deserves. The report states that Tom Gilmartin received a telephone call from an individual who introduced himself as Garda Burns and that Mr. Gilmartin was "effectively warned away from the path that he had by then embarked on, namely dialogue with the Gardaí regarding allegations of corrupt practices and demands for money". The tribunal found that the purpose of the telephone call was to "discourage, intimidate or warn Mr Gilmartin to desist from any further cooperation with the Garda inquiry". More seriously, the report concludes that the complaints made to the Garda by Tom Gilmartin about George Redmond, Liam Lawlor and Councillor Finbarr Hanrahan were not thoroughly investigated by the Garda. In the damning closing of this section:

Notwithstanding Superintendent Burns' evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal believed it likely that Mr Lawlor's position as a TD was a factor in the decision taken by the investigating Gardai not to interview him in the course of their inquiry. The Tribunal was puzzled as to why the final Garda report went to such lengths to exonerate Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Redmond in the absence of a more comprehensive inquiry into complaints of corruption against those two individuals.

It is no wonder that corruption thrived when this was the attitude of sections of An Garda Síochána, including perhaps at a very high level. I recall that in the same period my fellow Sinn Féin councillors and I were subject to regular harassment by members of the Garda special branch while going about our legitimate business as elected representatives and members of a legal political party. If some of that very valuable Garda time had been spent investigating corruption rather than trying to dissuade people such as me away from the political course to which we had committed ourselves, we might have been spared some of the millions spent on this and other tribunals.

I believe the conclusions of the tribunal report with regard to planning are too narrow in scope. I accept that the tribunal was dealing with corruption with regard to development plans, rezoning and hugely lucrative commercial developments. However, in the interim, as the report acknowledges, planning law has changed greatly. The role of councillors has been diminished because of the abuse of those powers by people named in this report and by many others. However, the report does not mention the fact that other aspects of planning and development laws and regulations have moved in a very negative and damaging direction. We had a regime which allowed scope for corruption of elected representatives. We now have a regime which has allowed widespread abuses by developers. The most outstanding example is of course Priory Hall. The disgraced developer Thomas McFeely and his Coalport company got away with building that apartment complex because of self-regulation. He is just one of many, albeit the most extreme example - at least to date.

The very governments whose members are found to have been corrupt in this report were the same governments that brought in so-called light-touch regulation for the construction industry. A citizen wishing to build an extension to his or her home must go through the full rigours of the planning laws but a developer can build houses and apartments for sale or rent to hundreds of people without any proper inspection regime in terms of construction standards and fire safety. It can all be done as a paper exercise with no on-site inspection by the local authority and that must change. This is important because we need to see the Mahon report not just in terms of personal corruption, but also in terms of systemic corruption, much of the latter, of course, being totally legal.

In 2006 I stated that the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, had been let off the hook about bigger scandals than those now confirmed by the Mahon report. At the core of these scandals was the close relationship between the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats Government and property developers, and the oil and gas industry. These scandals included the changing of Part V of the Planning and Development Act after intensive lobbying from developers. The original Part V required developers to provide 20% social and affordable housing in all developments. This was changed by the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats Government at the developers' behest to allow them buy their way out of their obligations by paying money to local authorities. As a direct result lower-income families were deprived of homes.

Major tax concessions were granted to developers of private hospitals. Bertie Ahern's successor as Minister for Finance, Charlie McCreevy, admitted that he brought in this concession after lobbying from a private hospital developer in his own constituency. This resulted in the allocation of land at public hospital sites to private developers to build private for-profit hospitals while our public hospital system struggled from crisis to crisis. That totally discredited scheme was eventually abandoned.

There is the ongoing robbery of our natural gas and oil supplies by multinationals which have been handed these resources virtually free gratis by successive governments, including the current Administration. That issue is live and current today. All of these measures were and are legal but totally unethical and against the public interest.

As I said in 2006, the brown envelope culture had been exposed but it was replaced with the institutionalised brown envelope. The Government's housing policy was driven not by the housing needs of families and individuals, but by the profit motive of developers and speculators. The amended Part V of the Planning and Development Act amounted to legalised and institutionalised bribery of local authorities by developers facilitated by the Government. It allowed developers to bribe their way out of providing social housing. As originally passed, the Act required developers to devote 20% of each housing development to social and affordable housing. The friends of Fianna Fáil in the construction industry raised an almighty clamour and the Act was amended to allow them to side-step this obligation by paying money or giving land to local authorities. Seldom, in my experience, has a lobby succeeded in getting a law changed in such a short time.

Of 80,000 new homes built in 2005, only 830 were allocated to local authorities under Part V. At that time the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, claimed that the Government changed Part V because of demands from all sides, including here in the Dáil. There was certainly pressure from some on the Government benches but the change was strongly opposed in this House and not only by Sinn Féin. Other parties and voices in this House were equally strong in their opposition. The pressure came from the developers and speculators who contributed so much to the funding of the Fianna Fáil Party. It was one of the quickest turnarounds ever for a political lobby.

This legal but corrupt relationship between Fianna Fáil and the developers was directly responsible for the property bubble and all the disastrous economic consequences. Their approach was driven by the lust for profits of the land speculators and the developers. This played into the hands of the lending institutions which profited from the massive scale of mortgages weighing down on young families. We pointed out at that time that the local authorities must be given a lead role in providing homes for our people. That was ignored.

I would have liked to have been able to add several points. I do not know whether this has been reflected in any of the earlier contributions - those I have watched on the monitor have not made reference to it. We should use the opportunity of this debate to express our apology on behalf of the people of the State and on behalf of all who work within its service in whatever way we do to Tom Gilmartin. He was a much maligned man who at a very difficult time in his own life had the courage to come forward and tell the truth of his experience. It is important that we record that. We should do whatever we can to show good faith with the man and his family. The Government owes it to the Oireachtas now to publish a detailed implementation plan with regard to the recommendations of the tribunal and I urge it to do so.

I agree with the previous speaker's remarks about Mr. Tom Gilmartin, who certainly did this country some service with his actions.

I want to join my colleagues in the Labour Party and elsewhere in welcoming the publication of the Mahon report. It is unfortunate that it took so long to complete its work, but the importance of the report cannot be ignored or understated. I will take a particular angle in my contribution. I represent Clondalkin, Lucan and Palmerstown, the area most adversely affected by the Dublin County Council decisions detailed in the Mahon report. Our proposed town centre was stolen from us and it can never be replaced. The damage done there will last and will be a monument to those bad decisions. Indeed, I was an unsuccessful candidate in the 1991 local elections in Clondalkin, an election which is referred to often in the Mahon report. I campaigned in favour of developing the original town site. For my efforts I can remember on one occasion being laughed at by Frank Dunlop. It is difficult to describe the atmosphere of the time but there was an absolute attempt to whip up as much community support as possible for the proposal to move the town centre from Ronanstown to Quarryvale. Every effort was made. At the time people were desperate for jobs because we were coming out of the 1980s. That helped the developers to get their way.

I emphasise that this is not a victimless crime. Perhaps it cannot be seen by others but I have before me a map of the area that was meant to be the town centre for Lucan and Clondalkin. It is still made up of green fields. The railway station for Clondalkin is in the middle of this area, the one area of Clondalkin and Lucan where there is no housing. This is a concrete example of the effects of the decisions. Had the town centre gone ahead in the original designated area, the railway station would be viable and there would be a viable centre there now, one accessible to people from Clondalkin and Lucan. That is not the position and it is a disgrace because when people moved to the Clondalkin and Lucan areas in the late 1970s and early 1980s, they had a reasonable expectation that the area would develop. The town centre area was moved to the extreme north-east corner of the Lucan-Clondalkin area. Therefore, it is not a town centre for either Lucan or Clondalkin. We are left with the current situation.

Earlier, I referred to the lonely train station in the one unpopulated area of the Clondalkin-Lucan conurbation. There are many other knock-on effects. Recently, Clondalkin lost the Permanent TSB bank to Liffey Valley. There are numerous similar small impacts. As it stands, the Liffey Valley centre is a commercial threat to the surrounding places of Clondalkin, Lucan and Palmerstown. As we speak there is a planning application from Tesco to build a large supermarket on that site. We must work out whether it should go ahead and what impact it will have on the immediate area.

I emphasise the point because most of the media attention on this issue has focused on the corruption. While it is proper that there is a focus on this, there has not been sufficient focus on the fact that those decisions have practical implications. They have had negative practical implications on the area I represent and other areas throughout Dublin. I urge the media to focus on this aspect of the problem as well. People have been badly served by these decisions. It must be understood that there are practical implications.

This betrayal was perpetrated overwhelmingly by Fianna Fáil representatives as well as some Fine Gael representatives on our council. Unfortunately, one Labour Party person was involved as well. We recognise this and the individual councillor was expelled from the Labour Party in 1993. We did not have to wait for the various tribunals and the Mahon report. I was not a member of Dublin County Council at the time but I am proud of the Labour Party members and some of the honourable members from other groups and parties who refused to yield to the temptation of seeking money for their votes. The people who stood out against this have never received the credit they deserved. Often, they were under considerable pressure.

I refer to some of the corrupt decisions themselves. The tactics used by those involved would not have been out of place on the script of "The Sopranos". I regret to note that even Sinn Féin got involved locally in efforts to whip up support for the rezoning because the area involved happened to be near the area of that party's greatest electoral support.

There are some good suggestions among the recommendations of the Mahon report. However, overall they are far too legalistic and not broad enough. The Kenny report has been adverted to. One of the key measures of that report which would help to prevent corruption is if the price of building land were regulated. The proposal in the report was that it should be set at the cost of farm land plus 25%. Such mechanisms would help to wipe out pernicious motivation to a great extent.

Other measures must be considered as well, although I do not allege any corruption in this regard. Let us consider the development levies which were valuable to councils before the Celtic tiger collapsed. One problem with these was the temptation on the part of council staff to go for the maximum development possible because it would yield the greatest levy. That is not a good way for decisions to be made. This aspect of the report should be considered. Another issue that must be considered as a result of the Mahon tribunal is the organisation of local government. I am somewhat fearful of the proposals, some of which may emasculate local government further. It is important to try to give local government sufficient power and the independent resources to operate. It is important that we draw a line under corruption and develop a total intolerance of it.

One problem with Ireland is that we do not sufficiently see the State as being made up of ourselves. Therefore, we do not sufficiently recognise an attack on the State as an attack on the people who live in the State. We would do well to adapt the slogan of the French monarch, Louis XIV, who said: "L'État, c'est moi". We should adapt this to say: "L'État, c'est nous". If we adopted this approach we would have a different way of seeing things. It would help to develop a greater public ethic in the country.

I agree with the remarks Deputy Ó Caoláin made on the Garda and the need to explain why some of these complaints were not followed up. There is a pressing need for justice to be done. We cannot undo the corrupt actions of others but it is important that we rebuild confidence in the political system. We must seek justice on all fronts in the way we follow up this report.

The Mahon findings are disturbing on many levels. The full extent of his analysis is well captured by the opinion piece of the historian Dermot Ferriter in The Irish Times of Monday, 26 March under the telling caption “State now morally as well as ethically bankrupt”. Naturally, these are not separate conditions; they are altogether entwined. The endemic, systemic culture identified by the Mahon tribunal during the late 1980s and early 1990s was one source of the property and lending bubble that brought the country to its knees.

The most striking aspect of the Mahon findings is the suggestion that those engaged in corruption had a sense of impunity and invincibility and that there was little appetite on the part of the State's political or investigative authorities to combat this effectively or to sanction those involved. In the words of Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Belatedly, Mahon's comments prompt the old Roman question: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Who will guard the guardians? This is the telling question.

The central question we in this House must ask is whether anything has changed since the completion of the beef tribunal? It is now over 20 years since the completion of that tribunal, but the only sanction that followed it was the bizarre charging of the journalist - now a Senator - Susan O'Keeffe in 1995 for contempt of court for not revealing her sources in unearthing the scandal at that time. Twelve months on from the Moriarty tribunal, can we be satisfied or sure that anything has changed or that any sanctions have been applied? We need more from Government than the customary passing of tribunal reports to the DPP, the Garda and the Revenue Commissioners. I acknowledge the sincerity of the Tánaiste when he stated on Tuesday that these organs of the State would be brought in to full use immediately, but we need something more telling than this. We need updates on progress and prosecutions.

Likewise, four years after the collapse of our banking sector, what sanctions have been applied to those responsible. Many rank and file bank officials face redundancy, but what sanctions have been visited on the directors, senior managers and regulators at the time? On 25 January this year, Mr. Justice Peter Kelly was driven to remark that he was taken aback to hear that only 11 gardaí were seconded to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement to work with the eight officials there on the investigation into the largest and most serious investigation in the State's history. I cited the remarks of Mr. Justice Peter Kelly in the High Court last May when we debated the issue of white collar crime here in the House. At the time he said he was extending the investigation by the Director of Corporate Enforcement and gardaí into Anglo Irish Bank to the end of July, as the progress of the two-year inquiry was "not at all satisfactory". A six-month extension had been sought. This was reported in The Irish Times of 11 May.

Mr. Justice Kelly also strongly criticised the failure to mount any prosecutions in other commercial court cases involving judgments for millions of euro, despite prima facie evidence and admissions of criminal wrongdoing, where papers to that effect had been sent years previously by him to the authorities. He stated: “This is not a desirable state of affairs.” He also said the apparent failure to investigate thoroughly, yet efficiently and expeditiously, possible criminal wrongdoing in the commercial and corporate sectors did nothing to instil confidence in the criminal justice system. Furthermore, when giving judgment and refusing an application for a six-month extension of the Anglo investigation, he said that he would extend the inquiry only to July 28, when he expected “much progress” to have been achieved. He warned that if a further extension was sought in July, he would have to be given a detailed update on progress, including what happened to material sent by the investigators to the DPP’s office in December and March. He said the collapse of Anglo had had profound and serious consequences for the economic well-being of the State and its citizens, had caused hardship to many small shareholders who invested in it in good faith and had played no small part in seriously damaging Ireland’s business reputation throughout the world. The Mahon report reflects the statements of Mr. Justice Kelly 12 months ago.

This time around, I suggest the Taoiseach refer the Mahon report to the investigating bodies and that he also consider the establishment of a new investigative regulator who will have the power to audit the progress of the various investigations. It is not good enough that, as we know now from the various tribunals, the operations of the State's investigative functions are so shrouded in secrecy and so unaccountable to the citizenry. Due to the division of responsibility between the Garda, which is charged to investigate, and the DPP, who is charged to prosecute, citizens cannot see where proceedings are being delayed. This opaqueness and lack of transparency leads to a general lack of confidence that timely sanctions will be applied. This sends a terrible message that corruption pays. Then we wonder why, in Judge Mahon's words, corruption is so "endemic and systemic".

I wish to note the Mahon report's commendations of some politicians. As Deputy Dowds said, it seemed that corruption extended across the political spectrum, but we are very fortunate that some politicians were commended. I will give credit where credit is due. The Minister, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, and the Tánaiste, Deputy Eamon Gilmore, are mentioned in Judge Mahon's report on pages 1068 and 1579 respectively. He commends them on the probity they showed in refusing developers' donations in 1992. It is fortunate they took that stand. If it came to light that anybody of that status was involved, even in a minor fashion, it would reflect badly on the country at this time. I also commend former Deputy Trevor Sargent and Mr. Tom Gilmartin who courageously stood against corruption at the time, which has led to the exposure of the whole despicable affair.

In spite of these commendable individual actions, the corruption train gathered speed among others. In order to rid the country of the culture of corruption, we must properly resource and independently audit the investigative functions of the State. Had, for example, Mr. Tom Gilmartin's original complaint been properly investigated at the time it was made by the Garda, we might have saved ourselves over €300 million, the cost to date of the tribunal. There are key lessons to learn for the future and let us hope we learn from this episode.

I have not read all of the report, but I have read the key sections. When making my contribution, I want to be objective and to look at the issues dispassionately. As public representatives, we must link in with what ordinary people see in the report. There is nothing really new in the report. The only aspect in any way new is what it says about the former Taoiseach.

The Mahon tribunal report states that the former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, told untruths and that former EU Commissioner, Minister and Deputy, Padraig Flynn, was corrupt. Above all else, we must learn from the report that people cannot abuse political office for personal gain and not suffer any consequences. Personal greed was the driving force and it follows that such people must feel financial pain. I commend the Taoiseach's decision to refer the report to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Revenue Commissioners, the Garda Síochána and SIPO, Standards in Public Office Commission.

The concern is that many of these people have become immune to guilt and in some cases, being found guilty is regarded as a badge of honour and this has been the case with previous tribunals. Bertie Ahern is the emperor with no clothes but in my view such persons should be stripped of their financial gains. It is not enough for tribunals to decide that a person has told untruths if that person does not suffer financial consequences. I commend the Taoiseach on the decision to examine the pensions for such officeholders under the constitutional convention. These individuals have destroyed the reputation of this country and of the body politic. Something good must result from this investigation by the tribunal and it may be good for Ireland's reputation in that we are seen to carry out such investigations and hope to restore the trust of the public in the political system.

The report makes for harrowing reading. I wonder if the former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, went to the tribunal in the full knowledge that he had significant problems but with the single objective to avoid a finding of corruption against him. He did not particularly care whether it was found that he was telling untruths and he concocted a defence which was that he was unable to verify from where the money came. It was like a play with different actors in every scene - different people appearing and disappearing. He now defies the tribunal's findings.

I say, shame on Bertie Ahern. The Irish people have been very good to him, they placed their trust in him and I hope people will now see that this former emperor has no clothes and never had any clothes, that much of it was pretence and dissimulation. I wonder if there is any shame. A person concocting stories for a tribunal must suffer consequences and if money is involved, a person must suffer financial pain. The ordinary members of the public make the point to me as a public representative that tribunals and investigations are great but if these people do not suffer financial consequences they wonder what is the point.

The Standards in Public Office Commission has received a complaint about Bertie Ahern's tax affairs. He produced a tax clearance certificate for 2002. The question now is whether he filed a false tax return. The query is with the Revenue Commissioners and the organs of the State need to be seen to deal with all people equally. Ordinary people in business know the Revenue Commissioners can make life very difficult. The small man is entitled to be treated in the same way as the big man. There is a view among the ordinary members of the public that ill-gotten gains by whatever circuitous means, can mean a person becomes untouchable. I hope the likes of Bertie Ahern are no longer the untouchables as a result of this report and that they will suffer the consequences and that the organs of the State will be seen to act. What is needed is fair play. If people are not guilty then so be it but if people try to make fools of the public and of tribunals, for their own ends, so that they will not have a finding of corruption held against them, but they told untruths, such persons must suffer the consequences and this is when the Revenue Commissioners, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Garda Síochána and SIPO must come into play.

This Republic must be seen to be free of political corruption and to achieve this balanced measures are required. Legislation dealing with political donations is being discussed by the House and legislation dealing with political lobbying is planned, along with whistleblower's legislation. We must examine the planning system at all levels and I include An Bord Pleanála. The system must be seen to be fair.

The report refers to giving all powers to the Executive but this is a concern. There needs to be a balance. Politicians, in the main, are general practitioners; we work for the people and we are not corrupt. Yet, this report indicates that corruption occurred at the highest level and that the view was one could not be successful unless one gave £50,000 to a Minister at the time, who used it for personal use. The farm of land in question should be sold. According to the report, Padraig Flynn took money under false pretences and that paid for the farm. What is Fianna Fáil doing about seeking the return of that money? There needs to be consequences for those who have abused their public position for personal gain.

Why did it take 15 years for the tribunal to complete its work at a cost of approximately €100,000 per page of the report? Young people who will be eligible to vote in three years' time were not even born when the tribunal began its investigation. This report is a good body of work which in my view took too long and which needs to be acted upon in a balanced way. The public need a transparent process in the political system which shows their interests are paramount. The organs of the State are hard on the small man. I know this from my experience over many years of dealing with business people who found it difficult. The former Taoiseach has not produced a tax clearance certificate for the 2007 election and this is the subject of a complaint to SIPO. The Revenue Commissioners need to review the files and action needs to be taken. The concern is that a person with enough money will be above and beyond the legal system and the organs of the State.

The people we represent, such as those with young families and the elderly, are the ones who matter. The investigations into the banking crisis need to be moved forward. Bankers were instrumental in wrecking our economy. Anglo Irish Bank has received €34 billion of taxpayers' money. The Irish Nationwide Building Society is now part of Irish Bank Resolution Corporation and we are seeking to renegotiate a deal on that in Europe. People need to be held to account and we need to see action in this regard.

This is about getting finance for personal use so hit them where it hurts - in their pockets. We need to ensure the organs of the State and the people concerned are seen to be held to account and will suffer consequences. In some cases, people appear to be immune from legal consequences but if we hit them in their pocket, they will feel the pain and that is what we need to see happening now.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Mahon report. It is only right and proper that after 15 years and €300 million, we, the democratically elected representatives, take time to debate its findings.

It is clear from the tribunal findings that there was a culture of endemic corruption in Irish politics during the 1980s and 1990s. As a member of Fianna Fáil, I am deeply ashamed and embarrassed about the level of my party's involvement. As one of the youngest Members in the Dáil, and the youngest member of the Fianna Fáil Parliamentary Party, I would like to believe that the use of power for illegitimate gains belongs well and truly to an era in the past. Tribunals of inquiry such as the Flood tribunal, now the Mahon tribunal, have been part of my youth and my adult life. It is hard to believe that, as a six year old boy growing up in County Westmeath, I was not paying much attention when the Flood tribunal was established. I did not understand the reason or need for it, or the implications it had for the citizens of the State at the time. All the same, various accounts and in-term reports have impinged on my consciousness. I now associate these tribunals with the politics of the past. For that reason, I am not in a position to form an opinion on whether all or any of the findings of the tribunal are fair and reasonable. However, given that we have entrusted the task to eminent judges, who have no axe to grind and no hidden agenda, it behoves all of us to accept that the findings are fair, reasonable and factual.

In my contribution I will focus on what we can learn from this sorry account of a bygone era and how we, as legislators, can ensure such things never happen again. Before I do that, I wish to make some points about the unbelievable rush by many other parties and certain members of the media to state that this practice was almost exclusive to Fianna Fáil. Our party leader has accepted the role the party played and has moved swiftly and comprehensively to deal with that. It is wrong to say that all members of Fianna Fáil are rotten to the core because of a number of individuals. Both before my time and currently there have been many honourable and decent public representatives within the Fianna Fáil Party. The Mahon tribunal states that corruption in Irish political life was both endemic and systemic. If we genuinely wish to move forward, we must all accept this finding and do whatever is within our power to help regain the trust of the electorate. I accept that those in our party have more to do than others.

There appears to be an agenda of guilt by association for members of Fianna Fáil - one must have known about all the wrongdoing that was going on. Yet no reference is made to the collective Cabinet responsibility when the most lucrative contract in the history of the State was awarded. There is also doublespeak about the Galway tent which rightly ceased to be an operation in 2008 while the Punchestown tent and the K Club golf classic carry on. The senior party in Government continues to rely heavily on corporate donations as a mechanism of funding. On two occasions in the past 12 months Fianna Fáil introduced legislation in Private Members' time to deal with a ban on corporate donations; on both occasions it was voted down. Members of Sinn Féin spoke about extortion. They were right because some of the practices they spoke about amounted to that. However, it is ironic to get lessons on extortion from members of Sinn Féin.

One of the first acts of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, was to close down the investigations into planning irregularities on six councils that had been initiated by the then Minister, John Gormley, in the previous Government. I do not suggest for one minute that two wrongs make a right because that is not the case. However, if we are to be real about reforming our public system and representing the people who have given us the unbelievable honour of representing them in this House, there can be no double standards or doublespeak. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Thanks to our Constitution, the powers of the Oireachtas are separate from those of the Judiciary and this has allowed the tribunal, once set up, to ensure independence and impartiality. I have some questions, however. One concerns the length of time it took the tribunal to make its recommendations. There is also the issue of the cost of tribunals, especially the fees paid to barristers and senior counsel to turn up for a watching brief. The lack of accountability is also a matter that must be discussed. There would seem be no administrative system to verify the accuracy or otherwise of accounts submitted by the said legal eagles.

Possibly the most striking issue, the one foremost in the minds of many men and women outside, the taxpayers, the people who unfortunately have to live in the built-up areas that are without adequate services, as a result of some of the disastrous planning permissions discussed in this report, is that the tribunal can only record an opinion, not a finding in law. There is an absence of power to impose specific sanctions against those found guilty of wrong doing. For that reason, I am glad the Government has referred the report to the necessary officials - the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Garda Síochána, the Revenue Commissioners and the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO. I encourage the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter, to carry on with what he spoke of in Opposition and ensure that the bankers who also helped to bring the country to its current position are held accountable.

I acknowledge that work has been done since 1997 to combat corruption in public office. SIPO was set up by an Act of 2002 to supervise disclosure of interests and tax compliance by public representatives. The Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001 implemented the highest standards of the OECD and the EU in regard to anti-corruption laws. I remind Members it was a Fianna Fáil Government which set up the planning tribunal to explore planning irregularities and payments to politicians. Unfortunately, this had to be done and I am glad it has been done. It is time to look to the future.

As a young politician, I have always been interested in politics. I became involved in politics at a young age through being elected to the student council at 14 years of age. It was always my intention to serve my people, to serve my community and to serve my country. Politics is a noble profession and one where service should be put above self. I cannot stress enough how imperative it is that there are lessons learned from the Mahon report and previous reports. Action must be taken and legislation must be drafted to ensure the recommendations from the Mahon report are not put on the long finger. It should not be the case that, as with the Moriarty report, 12 months have passed and still there is no action.

The Mahon recommendations must be examined systematically and acted upon within a clearly defined timeframe over the lifetime of the Government. It comprises a sad and sorry saga of widespread corruption, deceit and fraud at the heart of Government and the corrosive effect the consequences had on society and democracy. Corruption, as outlined in the Mahon report, represents a fundamentally destructive force. We must develop a culture of absolute intolerance of corrupt practices. It is a silent crime fostered by weak systems and a lack of accountability. The rule of law is grievously undermined, thus maintaining inequality and injustice and rotting the fabric of democracy to the core. Corruption might be a silent crime but its not without victims, as evidenced by the pain and suffering of thousands of couples enduring negative equity on partly finished estates in this city and beyond.

There has been much deliberation on Fianna Fáil. The statement of the party leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, last Thursday and his speech to this Dail last night were mean-spirited, petty and politically partisan. To mention Fine Gael as he did is a clear example yet again of Fianna Fáil refusing to put its hands up unambiguously. Rather, it was attempting to muddy the waters and throw as much blame around the political system in an attempt to convulse an already confused electorate.

We can compare Bertie Ahern's speech on Charles Haughey and Deputy Martin's speech on Bertie Ahern in recent times. There has been a time lapse of 15 years but a remarkable similarity in tone and content: "No one is welcome in this party if they betray public trust"; there will be no place in our party "for that kind of past behaviour"; "Participation in the democratic life of this country is about public service, not self-service or the sustaining of a certain lifestyle"; and "It is unacceptable in a manner hitherto concealed from the public that a Taoiseach should be personally supported". I could go on but time forbids me.

Just as Bertie Ahern learned his trade and cut his political teeth on the lap of Charles Haughey, Deputy Martin learned his trade and cut his teeth on the lap of Bertie Ahern. On 27 February 2008, when the whole country knew the evidence was incredible, Deputy Martin said "I do believe what the Taoiseach is saying at the tribunal". One month later, on 31 March, he had full confidence in Bertie Ahern and praised him in his role as leader of Fianna Fáil and Taoiseach. In this regard I acknowledge the contribution of former Senator Eugene Regan, who was harassed and vilified by senior Fianna Fáil figures, some of whom still serve on the Fianna Fáil Front Bench but who are not in the Chamber at the moment. Senator Regan's comments were fully vindicated.

Fianna Fáil has a long track record of failure to investigate allegations of corruption, as the Mahon report starkly points out. Attempts were made to prevent and sidetrack Garda investigations into corruption. It appears no institution of the State was safe from Fianna Fáil influence and duress over a long period. This is a consequence of being in power and control for so long and it is not just Ahern, Flynn, Burke, Haughey and Lawlor. Rather, it goes back to 1967 and the extraordinary admission of the late George Colley who, as a member of the Fianna Fáil Front Bench in government, spoke openly about low standards in high places, referring to his fellow Front Bench Members. It was clear at that time as it is clear now that the generation after de Valera, Aiken and McEntee joined not for any ideology or public service but for self-advancement, power, influence and personal enrichment. Astonishingly, a few years ago a Fianna Fáil backbencher from Sligo-Leitrim took pride in announcing this in the House when praising the job creation attributes of the Gallagher family in Sligo , a family with very close links to Fianna Fáil and one of whom was a long-standing Member of this House. The then Deputy, Mattie Brennan, said that a householder would not qualify for a grant unless the house was fitted with a Fianna Fáil lock from Gallaghers of Tubbercurry. It was admitted openly that all local authority houses in the jurisdiction had to be fitted with a Gallagher Fianna Fáil lock. That is influence when one can forget about the tendering process.

It started with the men in mohair suits and TACA and continued right down to the tent in Ballybritt. The 19th century Liberal scholar and one-time MP for Carlow, Lord Acton summed it up: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Did he have Fianna Fáil in mind when he said "The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party...that succeeds by force or fraud in carrying elections"?

This present Government must show an unstinting appetite for reform. I welcome measures in the programme for Government and those introduced so far involving the Department of Justice and Equality, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. This involves not just legislation but also enforcement. I propose going further and introducing an independent commission against corruption chaired by Judge Mahon, unless someone can put forward the name of a more qualified independent chairman, to act as a watchdog against corrupt practices. The body should be independent of the Executive and guaranteed a sufficient budget on an annual basis from Dáil Éireann. The commission should have four units, the first of which is the investigation unit working with CAB, the serious fraud office of the Garda Síochána, the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social Protection. Second, it should have a legal unit linked to the parliamentary oversight committee if that is given additional powers of responsibility, which I hope will be vested in the committee by the people, although it did not happen last October. Third, an arm should deal exclusively with education and research against corruption so we encourage people at an early age to distinguish between corrupt practices and acceptable practices by public representatives in the democratic process. Fourth, it should have a corporate and commercial services unit dealing directly with the Director of Corporate Enforcement. I am frustrated by the delays in inquiries by the Director of Corporate Enforcement and Director of Public Prosecutions over the past two years. The key elements are the independence of the commission, clear procedures and a reporting hierarchy. There must be buy-in from civil society by harnessing public support.

Fighting corruption is a collective responsibility and prevention is better than cure, better than punishment and better than maintenance. The Mahon report must be seen as a beginning. We are embarked on a delicate process of restoring our international reputation and lifting the shackles of the IMF from our every economic move. Side by side, we must embark on a similar endeavour to restore a climate of ethics around our planning and development practices domestically. The same level of vigour and energy must be expended in the task to fight corruption. Judge Mahon must be discretionary on costs and such discretion must be based on the matter of delay, obstruction and failure to co-operate over a period of 15 years. That must come into play in the matter of the awarding of third party and other costs.

The value of the €300 million and 15 years of time, energy and effort will be gauged on the progress those of us in this House facilitate and on the success of such facilitation in restoring trust, confidence and respect. I conclude with another quote from the late Lord Acton who stated: "Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought."

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Mahon tribunal report. I acknowledge that the findings of the Mahon tribunal are a damning indictment of a political system that was rotten and riddled with corruption. I take the opportunity to pay tribute to Judge Mahon and his legal colleagues at the tribunal. He has done the State a service pursuing this issue despite the best efforts of some former Fianna Fáil Ministers but if we are to be honest with ourselves we must also recognise that political corruption did not start or end with the Mahon tribunal. The Mahon tribunal is but a snapshot of the times in which we were living. Corruption existed long before the Mahon tribunal and has continued right up until today. It will continue until those with courage stand up, shame those involved and offer real and credible alternatives.

I became involved in politics because I believed in politics and active citizenship. I firmly believe that politics can improve the quality of people's lives. I believe that people have rights and responsibilities and that those rights and responsibilities must be upheld, defended and strengthened. When I look back, I see a history riddled with political corruption. James Connolly said that with partition we would have a carnival of reaction. He rightly predicted what would happen. Unfortunately, that has been in full swing, and we have seen various manifestations of it.

What we have is a very conservative State where the institutions of the State, including local government, have been dominated by a right wing, conservative political ideology and, therefore, prone to corruption. We have had consecutive Governments in this State that have failed the people. If the Proclamation of 1916 and the Democratic Programme of the First Dáil were the measures of success, many Governments in the past would have failed. Generations have been laid to waste in reform schools, unemployment queues, emigration and drug addiction. All of those crises were overseen by the main parties in this House. No generation has escaped the corruption and the failed promises. The Mahon tribunal should force many in this House, both in Government and in Fianna Fáil, to take time to reflect on the reason they are involved in politics.

It must be said that there is still too close a relationship between big business interests and politicians. While we have families struggling to make ends meet, people languishing in unemployment and people queuing to emigrate, the Government intends to hand over €3.1 billion to the Angle Irish zombie bank this weekend or to turn it, as we are being told, into a sovereign bond that will be glued to the backs of Irish children who are going to school today to be paid at some future date, with interest. That is also corruption. It may be legal but it is corruption. We have a Government that promised a new way of doing business, yet it still prioritises the needs of big business over the needs of the public. The lessons of Mahon appear to have fallen on deaf ears.

Donations to political parties and politicians must be reduced at least to a level recommended by Judge Mahon. Last week, we had a debate here on corporate and other donations. We believe corporate donations should be banned.

People are deeply concerned about the relationship in the 1990s between the then Fianna Fáil Government and major oil companies. I pose the question: did Fianna Fáil receive dollars or sterling from an oil company called Enterprise Oil, and what was the relationship between John McGoldrick and Des Richardson?

At the time when much of the corruption outlined in the Mahon tribunal was taking place, those of us in our party were marginalised, vilified and censored by all the major parties in this State, but we received a genuine and warm welcome in those working class communities that felt abandoned by the political class. Communities in Ballyfermot and Tallaght welcomed us into their community centres to allow us space to meet and debate important issues, including the peace process, tackling unemployment, the housing crisis and much else.

The Mahon tribunal points the finger at both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Elected members of both parties are implicated in corruption. Both parties must sort out their own houses. Swift action must be taken if confidence on the part of the electorate is to be restored. If cases of corruption are to be investigated leading to prosecutions, the Garda must receive the support of all parties in this House.

To further restore confidence, reform of local government must also take place. To date, local government reform has been seen as an excuse to undermine local authorities. Democracy, and local democracy in particular, has been eroded, with more power residing with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and unelected city and county managers who remain unaccountable.

Ironically, a greater travesty is the power of planning and building regulations which currently still lie with developers, and the policy of self-policing and self-certification. That has led to the problems in Priory Hall, the Riverside apartments in Portarlington, County Offaly and hundreds of other estates across the country. A legacy of the corruption is the 1,800 empty houses left standing, with over 2,000 unfinished housing developments.

I say sincerely that the proposed reform of local government by the Minister, Deputy Hogan, offers a real opportunity to make local government workable and accountable. Sinn Féin proposes a programme of real local government reform that is radical, practical, realistic and solution based. We believe that good planning makes all the difference to community and family life. Responsible, ethical and sustainable planning, underpinned by equality considerations, is the right of all who live in Ireland. Property developers must not be allowed to build new housing developments without taking into account the need for the provision of basic facilities and amenities. That is the key to much of what went on and where things went wrong.

For all communities to thrive and be sustainable, they require essential physical and social infrastructure. Sinn Féin is not saying it has all the answers but we have developed sustainable communities criteria based on the delivery of economic and social rights. All planning decisions must meet those criteria before earning the support of local authority members. These criteria include a sufficient supply of social and affordable housing, a safe and adequate water supply, adequate and proper sewerage, access to public transportation, employment, health care, child care and schools as well as reasonable access to local amenities including shopping, play areas, recreation facilities, community and social centres and cultural amenities. If those criteria had been in place for councillors when they were zoning land, it could not have been done on a bribe because they would not have met those criteria. That is the key point we are making. If clear criteria had been set out in different county and city councils, local councillors would have been able to judge whether a particular area should have been zoned. Unfortunately, what happened instead was that brown envelopes were changing hands.

The Mahon tribunal has given us a snapshot of the way politicians in both of the major parties were abusing their positions to line their pockets while making millionaires out of developers. Our job is to make sure that we do something about that and not just complain about it. Our job is to ensure that public office is never again brought into public disrepute and that we put in place systems that work for the people and not just for a few developers.

I appreciate that the Government and the Whips have set aside a substantial amount of time this week for this debate in that it is taking place over three days. However, at the same time it is not satisfactory or enough. We are now in the graveyard shift and many Deputies and members of the media have gone off for their tea, I presume, and there is not much interest in the debate. This should be televised because it is our Parliament. What we need after the report of the Mahon tribunal is for the political system to react and the Parliament to debate it in a considered and thorough way and then make decisions on what to do next.

We have been waiting for this report for a long time and much water has gone under the bridge, although from listening to this debate one would never think so. The report runs to thousands of pages. I read what I could of it and I have tried to digest as much as I could of what it means. However, I have not had enough time. It contains many significant findings and recommendations. We must also consider that what is at stake with the report is democracy and our political system. We do not need knee-jerk reactions or to be passive as politicians and implement the recommendations simply because they are made or, alternatively, do not do so because it is not convenient.

I read as much media coverage as I could over the weekend. One of the articles I read was by John Waters who wrote about the lack of analysis in media reports, particularly in the broadcasting media. He stated it was basically repetition of the headlines of the report. I would add to this that there was sensationalism and sweeping statements. Many people have made simplistic comments on it. I did not see any profound analysis in the media. I saw what I expected from people and nothing more.

Many people commenting say all the dogs on the street knew what was happening. I was at the coal face in the Lucan electoral area where the planning decisions on Quarryvale and other developments were taken. I was not an elected representative but we did not know. We knew decisions were being made and we tried to stop them as best we could but we did not know money was changing hands and we did not know about what has come out in the report. Why did the people who say everyone knew not say it at the time? If everyone did know why was it not in our news media? Why was it not being reported?

Much of what happened did not start between 1989 and 1991, the years with which the tribunal report begins. What happened in the Lucan area started when the former Deputy, Liam Lawlor, who has since passed away, tried to have his own land rezoned, I believe in 1981. This was an extremely questionable and controversial decision, so much so that the then Taoiseach, Charlie Haughey, had it overturned. Many other bad decisions were made. Decisions were not taken in the interests of the community or with its wishes.

There is not enough commentary. Perhaps it is because politicians are on the defensive but this is not the full picture. Corruption is not endemic in political life. Most people going into politics are honest. This is my fundamental profound way of thinking about politics. People take easy swipes at politicians because they think they can. We must defend the political system. There were councillors who did not get involved in this. Many people campaigning against the rezoning ran for election and my father was one of them. He lost out to John O'Halloran in the 1991 local elections. Community groups were established to fight against the rezonings. I knew and worked with many of them who have since passed away. They were constantly vigilant against attempts to rezone lands which had been protected and they achieved some victories. While the local communities were victims they were not passive victims. People got organised and Lucan Planning Council was established to fight attempts to rezone lands, for example at Liffey Valley.

Members of the electorate reacted because they stopped voting for Fianna Fáil in the numbers they had been in local elections. There has not been a Fianna Fáil councillor based in Lucan since the 1999 local elections and a Fianna Fáil representative was not elected in the ward in the past two local elections. This is largely because of the bad planning decisions. Much good work has been done since then. Communities adapt and they are resilient. There is much community effort in places such as Quarryvale and Lucan and I am sure it is the same in other communities. People adapt, they must live with the fact that Liffey Valley exists and they make the best of it.

When I was a councillor we dealt with the Adamstown strategic planning zone. It was adopted by the council to try to prevent what had happened before. It involved proper planning whereby developers had to provide facilities in tandem with developments. It has only approximately 1,000 houses but there are three primary schools, an outstanding second level school and a train station. The developers were made to provide all of these thanks to the work of councillors. This is to make the point that there is a far more complex picture then is being painted by many people who churn out their columns and who make soundbites in reaction to all of this.

A new Government was elected in 1992 and many measures were introduced which have made a difference in politics, including the Freedom of Information Act, legislation on disclosures, political donations and political expenditure. In the history of South Dublin County Council, which was established in the mid-1990s, a section 4 was never proposed or passed because of the stigma attached to it and its bad reputation. The voters did not want this type of thing any more and the councillors ensured that it did not happen. I do not suggest it is perfect, but like the rest of life politics is complex with good and bad people who do good and bad things. We must realise this is the case and we should not throw out the baby of democracy with the bath water of what has happened.

I examined the recommendations as best I could, in particular with regard to planning because this is what it is all about. I agree on the need for more checks and balances and transparency. Some work has been done on this but there is no question that more needs to be done. We need to give more democracy to local government. We need more participation by the public in decisions taken. We should not let the elitists who now say, "I told you so" rule the day and have democracy at local level emasculated. We do not want this.

While I agree with some of the report's recommendations, as a democrat I fundamentally disagree with others. Paragraph 1.14 of chapter 18 of the report states the ability of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to give directions to regional and local authorities should be entrusted to a planning regulator. I have a profound problem with this. John Gormley, as a member of the previous Government, changed the system from where the Minister could give direction on a development plan if he was not satisfied it conformed to strategic policy to the Minister being able to make a development plan for councillors. Democracy could be bypassed with the decision being made at the top. The tribunal states planning powers have been too centralised, but it proposes the same powers be handed over to a regulator. This assumes that just because someone is unelected he or she is less likely to be corrupt, but this is not borne out by what has happened throughout our history in many respects and in many institutions. There is no guarantee that just because someone is not elected he or she will not be corrupt.

There is an idea that a Minister or a regulator at the centre can make decisions for what goes on in local communities. Local communities have something to say about what plans are made for their areas. The way this was done was through their local representatives.

Top
Share