Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2012

Vol. 761 No. 1

Mahon Tribunal Report: Statements (Resumed)

I was in the middle of my contribution last night and I propose to share time with Deputy Dara Calleary.

I do not accept the double standards that are being applied. It is important for other political parties also to acknowledge their involvement. Mary Muldoon, a Fine Gael councillor, stated on radio yesterday morning that 50% of Fine Gael councillors took bribes. That was a reference to the "2 by 4" club and how regular meetings and lunches took place between some councillors and Frank Dunlop.

As a relatively new Fianna Fáil TD, I am confident these findings are being dealt with in the swiftest way possible. Within 12 hours of the report being published, the party's officer board met and decided to take action. Already, five individuals have resigned as members of Fianna Fáil. Even after acting swiftly, however, Fianna Fáil is being criticised for not acting sooner, that we should not have believed certain evidence when it was being given and that we should have pre-empted the final report. That kind of partisan commentary is lazy and immature. As a republican, I believe in fair process and firmly believe our party could not have acted on any individual prior to the final report being published.

It is ironic, therefore, that Fine Gael and Labour have yet to act on the recommendations of the Moriarty tribunal report even though it was published one year ago to the day last Thursday. When it was published the Taoiseach stated: "This report will not gather dust." That is exactly what is happening with it. Again, this is a case of double standards, particularly when at the time the Taoiseach stated "...to recreate political virtue, to rebuild public trust, to restore our reputation, it is no longer sufficient to do what is correct...we must do what is right".

There is no evidence of any such action being taken. It has joined the long list of broken promises made already by this Government. The Taoiseach, while welcoming the Moriarty report, was very careful about accepting the recommendations of the report and to my knowledge has yet to do so. I acknowledge the report was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions and to the Garda but has either the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste accepted the recommendations and said so publicly?

The Fianna Fáil Party I am a member of will not tolerate or fail to condemn abuse of public office, whether in our own party or, as the Moriarty report revealed, in other parties. As a party, we have advanced draft legislation that seeks to implement the recommendations of the Moriarty report. I hope the Government parties will show the support for this legislation to back up their rhetoric.

When the Mahon report was first published, rather than concentrating on what the report said about Fine Gael members, Government TDs and Ministers rushed to latch on to comments made in the report about Cabinet Ministers in the previous Government. They were like a choir saying the previous Government tried to obstruct the tribunal. That was not a finding in the report. The reference did not contain any names. I do not believe there was ever any attempt by any previous Government Minister to obstruct the tribunal. There was a great deal of public commentary and political debate about the length of time and the cost of the tribunal but it was never anything more than that. There was no reference last week to the time the Minister, Deputy Alan Shatter, accused the Smithwick tribunal of trying to interfere with that inquiry. There was never any criticism when the Minister, Deputy Howlin, criticised the role of the independent Referendum Commission following the most recent referendum result. The selectivity is remarkable.

The Deputy's own selectivity is remarkable too.

Regarding what has been said about the planning inquiries initiated by the former Minister, John Gormley, it is not good enough that these planning inquiries are being delayed and conducted on the basis of an internal review.

He never set them up in the first place. He never appointed anybody to do them.

It is having a Department review of local authorities when such serious questions and allegations are arising. Inaction is suppression, and it ill behoves any Minister to try to suppress such an important process which was commenced by John Gormley.

That is not fair. There was no attempt to suppress anything.

It is ironic that anybody should seek to-----

We are over time, Deputy. Thank you.

-----criticise John Gormley, above all people, for trying to initiate and set up a process of a planning inquiry.

He never set it up. He did not appoint people in the seven months.

We know his credentials, and that must be said in his defence because his-----

Deputy, we are over time.

He had seven months.

-----actions have been misrepresented by Government speaker after Government speaker. We will wait and see what will be the actions of this Government regarding the follow through on these inquiries which he did initiate.

He had seven months and he never set them up.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Mahon report. Since we as Members were elected to both this House and the other House we have been placed in a very challenging position with the publication of the Mahon tribunal report but also with the publication of the Moriarty tribunal report. I cannot imagine that any Oireachtas in the history of this institution had before it in one term two reports that have gone to the heart of everything we do as Members of an Oireachtas and as public representatives both locally and nationally. Regardless of whether we belong to a party, we must act on these reports to ensure that no future Oireachtas has to deal with this kind of legacy.

The Mahon report is a catalogue of disservice. Every single finding represents disservice, at the very least, betrayal and, in many cases, treachery. It represents disservice to the people in communities across this country who are the living victims of the report and everything contained in it. They were sent into housing without proper facilities in areas where there are still no functioning community, transport or sporting facilities. It is a disservice in terms of the trust communities across this country placed in their public representatives, be they local or national. It is a disservice to the reputation of this country nationally and internationally.

In terms of those members of my party against whom findings have been made it is a disservice to the very decent members of our party across this island who feel betrayed and disgusted by everything they had seen in the Mahon tribunal and who feel let down by those members of our party named in the report. It is a disservice to the thousands of people who serve and have served as public representatives in this House, in the other House and in council chambers across the country since the foundation of the State who served only in the interest of their communities and in doing so made huge sacrifices.

As an Oireachtas, we face a particular challenge. We have got to deal with the findings in this report and in the previous report. We must deal with that legacy of disservice and ensure that we act and meet the challenge head-on. All of us would do well to read chapter 18 and the recommendations therein. I hope that rather than coming back with some vague aspirational proposal the Minister, Deputy Hogan, as the Government's co-ordinator of the response, will come back in May with an action plan for the Government's implementation plans and timelines for dealing with the proposals in chapter 18. As we prepare to enter the Easter recess it is not too much to ask that by the time we approach the summer recess in the middle of July many of the recommendations, legislatively or otherwise, will be in place or published because if we are serious we must do it as quickly as that.

I know the Government parties are slightly sensitive about the entire area of the Moriarty report. I will not engage in the slagging because I do not want to deflect the focus from the report we are discussing but we must consider that this week last year we were having a similar debate on the Moriarty tribunal. In that debate 99% of us who are in this House to try to do the job expressed the same thoughts and annoyance but a year later we are not much further on in regard to the Moriarty report. For the sake of those of us who are here and those we serve, much greater attention must be paid to that particular tribunal report.

It is clear that our party is the focus of this tribunal report, although other parties are mentioned. We moved very quickly on it. Within hours of the publication of the report we convened our officer board and moved very quickly in terms of expulsions and reorganisation of areas. However, it is important from our point of view that the meeting that will take place this Friday is not the end of the process but the start of a process. The document has gone to our rules and procedures committee and we will bring in many changes to the way we do things. We take this report seriously and those of us who serve the party today will be measured by the way we have reacted to this report and the way we have changed our way of doing things.

All the focus of the coverage has been on the personalities within the tribunal and the political classes. Meanwhile, the people in those communities I mentioned - I am glad the Minister of State is in the Chamber - who are the real victims have not been the focus of that coverage. Communities in this city and probably throughout the island have been really blighted by bad planning and by the manner in which maps and zonings were moved around like pieces on a chessboard, and today people live in communities with no facilities. The Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, should consider an audit of the planning decisions referred to in the Mahon tribunal report, or perhaps going further to include all planning decisions made at the time by Dublin City Council and examine what community, sporting, justice and child care facilities are in place in these communities.

If a targeted investment programme needs to be put in place to give the people in these communities the facilities they deserve, I think the Minister of State would have the support of the entire House to do so. Rather than merely dealing with all of the political issues contained in the Mahon tribunal report, let us not forget the people who lives are affected every day by the decisions and choices made as a result of the madness. They need to be remembered. I hope the Department's response includes an audit of facilities, particularly in west Dublin.

I have been re-elected to the Dáil, and there is a theory that those of us whose parents or grandparents also served here inherited our seats. This is wrong. What I have not heard is a certain respect for the House and a certain standard of how one operates as a Member of the House. It really pains me this standard has been weakened for all of us. The actions of the few have impugned every Member whether we like it or not. Unfortunately, the Mahon tribunal report has impugned every person who has served in the House since the foundation of the State. It makes me mad that the decent people in all parties and none who served in the House and in council chambers are tarred with the same brush as those named in the report and those who destroyed this profession in the interests of lining their own pockets.

We need to go through the Punch and Judy aspect of this, which we are doing now, but unless the Oireachtas decides this is it and that no future Oireachtas will have to debate such a tribunal and unless we take action by the summer recess to ensure this never happens again, we will not only do a disservice to future parliamentarians, but also to those who have served without their careers being impugned. We entrust this to the Government and the Ceann Comhairle and they will have my full support in doing so.

The final report of the Mahon tribunal into certain planning matters and payments, which was published last week, is a tale of deceit and corruption which was 15 years in the making. These 15 years have been condensed into just over 3,200 pages which confirm what many members of the public had believed during that time, namely, that big business and those in high political office conspired to corrupt the planning process at the expense of ordinary citizens.

Since the publication of the Mahon tribunal report I have spoken with many grassroot members of Fianna Fáil, some of whom are personal friends of mine. As Deputy Calleary pointed out, there is no doubt many of them are hurting at the revelations outlined in the Mahon tribunal report. As a political activist, I know the time and effort invested in political parties. They are now questioning what it was all for. They feel betrayed and dismayed by the actions of fellow Fianna Fáil members, whether former taoisigh, Ministers or councillors. They put their faith and trust in them to represent everything they held dear but, as we now know, they abused that trust.

Greedy individuals with no sense of remorse used their positions of influence in Fianna Fáil to line their own pockets with corrupt payments by corrupt developers at the expense of the very communities they were elected to represent. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind following this report that some of the most senior figures in Fianna Fáil were up to their necks in the type of politics which served nobody but themselves. These same people, leading members of Fianna Fáil, were responsible for nurturing, developing and maintaining the brown envelope culture which has existed for far too long in Irish political life. As a politician and Member of the House, I am angry at this. More importantly, as a citizen of the State, I am absolutely sickened by their actions. There is no place in Irish politics for the sleazy dishonest bribery and corruption which prevailed in Fianna Fáil and which a broke political system based on partition helped cultivate. There was no place for it then, there is no place for it now and there is certainly no place for it in the future.

The dog in the street knew the story with brown envelopes, golden circles and political parties such as Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. It is a scandal that it took so long and so much of taxpayers' money for it to come out eventually. The people named in the report disgraced themselves, their families, their party and the State. When it came to the planning process in the State, the old phrase, "it is not what you know but who you know", sprang to mind. With the corrupt local public representatives of the time and those in high office, it was not only about who one knew, but how much cash to take with one. It was not a question of whether they could be corrupted, but at what price. They sold the integrity of politics to whomever they wanted regardless of the consequences for the ordinary hard-working decent people on the island. The citizens had already been shafted by the government of the day which was hell-bent on introducing policies to widen the gap between the haves and the have nots. They did more to embed inequality into the social fabric of Ireland then our colonial neighbours across the water.

From the very bottom to the very top of government, politics was corrupt. Those at the centre of it operated as if they were untouchable. Phrases such as the "Drumcondra mafia" and the "Teflon Taoiseach" would not sound out of place in an episode of "The Sopranos" but sadly they were the people entrusted with the public interest of Irish citizens.

When people asked questions, the political gangsters high on the trappings of power acted with a level of audacity that is nothing short of astonishing. Throughout the duration of the tribunal's workings a serious amount of criticism was directed at its members by the very political elite which had established it in the first place. Rather than defending its integrity, they chose to attack its independence for self-serving reasons. Attempts were made to end the tribunal altogether with concerns for public spending used as a smokescreen to hide naked self-interest and self-preservation.

The report of the Mahon tribunal states that during 2007 and 2008 members of the Cabinet embarked on a sustained attack against it. Some Cabinet members questioned not only the legality of the tribunal, but also the integrity of its members. These attacks came about mainly but not exclusively as a result of the tribunal's inquiries into Bertie Ahern's conduct. Deputy Micheál Martin was a senior member of the Cabinet then and he is now leader of Fianna Fáil. Deputy Martin has a number of questions to answer regarding the conduct and credibility of his party colleagues who are still members of the Dáil and who were Cabinet Ministers at the time. The public has a right to know whether these people, such as Deputies Martin and O'Dea, are willing to share in the collective responsibility that comes with serving in Cabinet, and whether they are willing to take ownership of the attacks on the tribunal. People also have a right to know if these attacks went to the top and were part of an orchestrated campaign at the behest of the disgraced former Taoiseach, Mr. Bertie Ahern. If Fianna Fáil could find it within itself to be honest, to put citizens' interests before party interests, to act in the State's interest rather than in its own it could then address this section of the report comprehensively. Deputy Martin had an opportunity to do this yesterday but rather than take responsibility for the actions of a Cabinet in which he served he rounded on every other political party in this Chamber. He was busy pointing out what he believed were Sinn Féin's flaws and failings as if this made what was discovered about Fianna Fáil by the Mahon tribunal any less repulsive.

Rather than lecture others, Deputy Martin should concentrate on getting his own house in order. It is simply not good enough for the leader of Fianna Fáil, a former Cabinet Minister, to say he does not know to whom the tribunal was referring in terms of its attacks on Fianna Fáil's integrity. One needs only to read the media reports from that time to know which Ministers were being referred to. Deputy Willie O'Dea, a man not unknown for attacking the integrity of honest people, had no hesitation in attacking the tribunal with his flippant comments about communion money and half crowns from Mr. Owen O'Callaghan. Just as people did not believe him in 2010, they do not believe his current statement that he did not try to undermine the Mahon tribunal.

Listening to the debate on this report, is it any wonder people have no faith in the political system? For far too long the political elite in this State, including Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Labour Party and the defunct Progressive Democrats, fostered a culture of dependency by citizens on politicians. Politician after politician allowed a system to develop which ensured people felt subservient to those in power. Citizens were forced into believing that if they wanted access to their rights they needed the nod and wink of their local councillor or Deputy for that to happen.

People have criticised the cost of the Mahon tribunal. Those who were against its existence were and remain happy to feed into that. Yes, it was lengthy and expensive but it was necessary. It was necessary because of the need to restore faith in the political structures of this State. Getting to the truth should not have cost so much. It is hoped the Director of Public Prosecutions' investigations into those found to have received corrupt payments will not take as long.

The allegation of corruption against former Taoiseach, Mr. Bertie Ahern, may not have been sustained in the tribunal but Justice Mahon did not hold back when he said he did not believe a word of his contributions to the inquiry. The former Taoiseach now feels hard done by. It is time for him to shut up or put up. If he feels aggrieved by the tribunal's findings he should take up the matter with the courts. He should recount to them the nature of his dealings, the bank accounts he did not have and tales about winning money on the horses. He can spin his untruths and false statements any way he wants to the courts. He should roll the dice and await the outcome. Better still, he should save us all the bother of having to listen to this sorry tale again and jump back into his cupboard, close the door and never reappear again.

The days of politicians believing they can operate like Mafia dons must be over if we are ever to restore public confidence in politics. Hundreds of people across this State are now bunkering down hoping all of this will blow over and that the outrage and anger of the people will be a one week wonder. They believe that if they can avoid scrutiny, wait it out and bide their time, they will then be able to come out from hiding underneath rocks and normal service will resume. The questions that we need to ask are how fundamental a break we want from the Frank Dunlops of this world and how committed are we to confronting and challenging these people and to breaking the golden circles, of which there was never just one, at the intersection of property, capital and elected representatives. The debate and choices before us are bigger than the Mahon tribunal. They are certainly bigger than the grubby little men exposed in this report as corrupt.

What happens in a few weeks when all has been said and done on the Mahon report and politicians have finished their finger wagging and political posturing depends on how we in this Chamber react. The vast majority of elected representatives in this Chamber, from all parties and none, are committed to public service. Corrupt politicians got us into this mess and it is now up to us as politicians to get us out of it. No person or party can turn away from the collective job of cleaning up politics for good. In that spirit, I ask that the Government consider the establishment of an all-party Oireachtas committee, the objective of which will be implementation of the Mahon tribunal recommendations. What better way for us to restore faith in the political system than through Members of all parties and none returning to this House in a few short months with some of the most far-reaching proposals for reform of the political system which this State has ever seen? While that would be a massive challenge rather than a small task it is one which we are up to, one which we will approach with humility and in the spirit of co-operation.

I urge the Taoiseach to look again at the scope and remit of the constitutional convention. The Mahon tribunal has sent out the clear message that our political system is corrupt from the ground up and that the very architecture of the State is crumbling. Trust in the institutions of democracy in Ireland is falling apart. A constitution is a contract between the people and the State. The Constitution of this State has been broken and cannot be repaired. It must be created anew. This Government should seize the opportunity afforded by its decision to hold a constitutional convention to open up a real debate on what the republic envisaged by the men and women of 1916 was about. Let us give all of the people on this island the opportunity to build a new republic, one which cherishes all of the children equally. If we do not grab that opportunity, we will be back here in the future discussing further corruption and other corrupt politicians.

The next speaker is Deputy Mattie McGrath, whom I understand is sharing time with Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan.

I too welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the final report of the Mahon tribunal. It is a pity it took 15 years for the tribunal to complete its work and that the costs associated with its work are huge. However, I suppose no price is too high in ensuring the truth is outed.

The Mahon tribunal investigated shady dealings, political payments, possible corruption and financial immorality. No one imagined this inquiry would take so long. While I do not wish to attack the tribunal I believe there was also financial immorality in terms of payments to some staff associated with its work, some of whom earned up to €2,500 per day. This must be examined in the context of future inquiries. The amount of money paid out in fees is equal to what it would cost to pay 2,500 highly qualified specialised nurses for one year, which staff are badly needed in our hospitals and so on. One can make many analogies. The costs associated with the tribunal are a serious issue of concern.

We all witnessed the charades last week when this report was published. There were similar charades in this House yesterday and again this morning. Inquiries were set up by the former Minister, John Gormley.

He never set them up.

It has been alleged that they have been suppressed.

He never put them in place.

He did put them in place. Excuse me. Can I continue without interruption? He did put them in place.

He never appointed the people.

He did put them in place.

I knew he did at the time. Where have they gone? What is happening to them at the moment? That is what I want to know. I believe we need-----

The Deputy can check with the Department.

I said to the media last week that we should not have any tribunal. We should have a Garda inquiry. References should be sent on to the Director of Public Prosecutions. There should be court cases. If anybody breaks the law, they should be before the courts rather than in an expensive tribunal. I believe we need the Criminal Assets Bureau and a proper inquiry at a very senior level of An Garda Síochána. This week, we saw the price of justice in Limerick. A decent family in the Minister of State's constituency had to leave this country because it had stood up to thuggery That should not have happened. It ill behoves us all in here to engage in cross-fire. The people want trust but they are not getting it. It is a pity that things have gone down that road.

I would like to speak about my former colleagues in Fianna Fáil. I have hundreds, thousands of friends in the Fianna Fáil Party. The highest of impeccable people up and down the country give their service to the party and to the country without ever expecting to get anything. They do it for love of country and for love of party. Indeed, my late father was a founding member of the party in my own area. The carry-on of a small number of people is hurting those people as well. Deputy Martin, who is now the leader of the party, has to deal with the residue of what is left of a cabal in my constituency of Tipperary South. The members of the cabal were the absolute architects of armageddon for the party, for the country and for the county. It is unfortunate that Deputy Martin is still dealing with the residue of that. He has to learn his own lessons there. He has to reach out over that cabal to the ordinary decent people of his party, in Tipperary South and beyond.

We have heard the findings of this tribunal and the last one, but what about the legacy? There have been no court cases. No one has been charged. What about the legacy? In fairness to the members of the mafia that has been mentioned, they are decent compared to some of the members of the cabal I have had to deal with during my political career in Tipperary South. What about Bertie Ahern? Who did he appoint as chairman of the ethics committee before he left here? All of these questions have to be asked. We are still dealing with the legacy of the very flawed judgment he showed. What about all of the many appointments to senior positions of trust that were made over the years? The vast majority of these people give top-class and outstanding service to this country. However, it is clear that there are bad apples in every bunch. I have come across a few of them. I have been the victim of a few of them. That is the legacy that has been left. How will that be cleaned out? I am disappointed that the new Government has made political appointment after political appointment to senior positions. I am talking about the justices and everything else. That system has to break. The Workers Party appointed them when it was there as well. I have no doubt that Sinn Féin would appoint them if it could get into government.

The system needs to be cleansed of political involvement because it is not safe. I became a victim of it. I am calling for a full-scale Garda inquiry. The Nora Wall case involved a friend of mine in Dungarvan. My own case was dragged through the courts. I want an inquiry into that because I believe there was political interference at the highest level. Openly political activists have been appointed as judges. I got one of them for my own court case. He did not come as a friend for me. He came to act on the behest of somebody else. It is just outrageous what went on, what is going on and what has gone on. Lives have been destroyed. People's families are in everyday trepidation and fear. There is political connectivity with senior positions in the Garda. I am talking about a small minority of gardaí. I support the Garda 100%. I am not talking about 99.9% of gardaí, but about one or two in the Dungarvan district, including a retired superintendent who was obviously the subject of a political appointment. A former Government Deputy went around boasting that he spoke to him and he was going to sort me out. In the name of God, the Mafia would pale into insignificance. He pointed out the kind of charges I was going to be charged with before I was ever charged. Thankfully, I was freed by a jury of my own peers. The fact that my judge could leave the court without ever dismissing the charges against my five co-defendants and myself-----

Sorry, Deputy.

That such institutional nepotism and corrupt practice could carry on in this country-----

The Deputy should be very careful in what he says in here.

Gabh mo leithscéal. It will take a long time before we clean that. We have to do it here. It behoves every elected member to do so. In fairness, 99.9% of all elected people here and everywhere else were elected for good motives - to serve the public rather than to be self-serving. I believe the pensions should be removed. There is no point in saying we cannot go back. We should remove the pensions of people who are found to have engaged in these activities. If I was convicted that time, I would be out of this House. That was the intention. That did not happen, thankfully, because of the decision of the jury. We have to remove the pensions from those who have tarnished the good names of the 1916 leaders, those involved in the War of Independence and those who established this State. The people in question have tarnished politics and tarnished democracy. Some of them are continuing to contaminate it. Some of the good people who go into careers in the Garda Síochána and the Judiciary etc., are being tarnished. They are not strong enough to stand up to it. This was the problem. I also want to inquire into certain planning matters in Clonmel town, which I did not represent on the town council. I refer to the decisions of former members of the council who are now retired. I have nothing to say about any serving members. As far as I am concerned, they are all above reproach.

I ask the Deputy to be careful. I said at the beginning of this debate that we must be careful not to imply wrong acts against people who are not here to defend themselves.

What is meant by "wrong acts"?

I appreciate that the Deputy has not mentioned names.

He has mentioned positions. Therefore, the person could be identified. I ask the Deputy to be careful.

Okay. I appreciate that, a Cheann Comhairle. I know that.

We should proceed in good faith.

I appreciate that everybody is entitled to his or her good name, as I am to mine. My good name was cleared by a jury, thank God. I referred to certain decisions that have been taken. I know an old man who wants his name to be cleared because of shady dealings before he goes to his grave. I met a former member of a corporation on Monday night and spoke to him at length. He wants his good name to be cleared. There is only one way to clear it and that is an inquiry. The man in question was bullied to vote in a certain way when he was a member of the corporation. The only way to clear his name is to have a proper inquiry. If it takes a Garda inquiry, so be it. I will be writing to the Garda Commissioner to look for such an inquiry. I have the height of respect for the senior gardaí in Clonmel and the people who will investigate it. I have no problem with them.

I also have the height of respect for the people who investigated my case, including Superintendent Dave Sheehan, an independent man who is now doing great work in dealing with serious crime in the Minister of State's constituency of Limerick City. There are some brilliant people but there are also some bad apples. In the middle of my case, one of them asked me why I did not pay the fellows who were making allegations against me. My retort was "Pay them off? And how much would you want? Get out of my face quick". I would not stand for that kind of political or Garda interference. It was just one man, or two people, but the rest of the good people are being tarnished by them.

We need a proper cleansing. That is why Deputy Martin has a hard job to do in putting Fianna Fáil back on the road. That has to be done for the sake of the past generations, those who are serving at the moment and the good people who want to go into politics. I was proud to be a part of that party, which has a proud heritage. Why do Deputies think I am outside it now? Certain cabals decided I was not fit for it, I might be too straight for it or I was not the right kind of person for it. My late brother, who was a paediatrician of some renown, was insulted on the night I was picked at a convention when he was told: "Do not worry. He will not be going for election. We will make sure. He might be nominated at the head of the poll but we will ensure he will be disgraced before the election comes along." They engaged in that kind of cronyism, blackguarding and bullying because they knew they would get away with it. They had the contacts. It was wrong that something like that could be said to a man who was never involved in politics.

I believe passionately that if we are to learn anything from the Mahon tribunal, we should learn lessons for the public and for all political parties. I wish Deputy Martin well. In fairness to him, he has dealt with it as best he can, as far as I can see from outside the party. Councillors across the floor have not been expelled or dealt with. Similarly, the Moriarty tribunal has not been dealt with. We need to be honest with ourselves and straight with the people. We should meet and support ordinary law-abiding citizens. We have to ensure there is trust in all our institutions and systems, from the bottom rank up. The political system, the Garda Síochána and the Judiciary, etc., need to live up to the highest standards at all levels. The people need to be able to have trust and faith in them. That has not happened in some cases, sadly. We need to learn lessons from those cases if we are to establish a decent political reputation and serve our people as we are supposed to do. It should not be a case of self-service.

My initial reaction to the publication of the Mahon report was to say it took far too long - 15 years - and cost far too much for it to be produced. It has been suggested that the tribunal has cost €97.9 million to date, but that figure could increase considerably if it is decided that all legal costs are to be met. My point is that any suggestion of wrongdoing - such suggestions were made prior to the 1990s and since - should be a matter for criminal investigation. Charges, trials, findings, judgments and punishments, as the case may be, could have emerged from those investigations. All of that would have been in progress or finished by now. We have tribunal millionaires as a result of the inordinate length of time the tribunal took. One of the reasons for this was the way the tribunal was set up. Its terms of reference were far too wide. I cannot help wondering if there was a certain ulterior motive for having such wide terms of reference. Was it hoped that nothing would be discovered?

I accept the tribunal's defence that the 32 legal challenges were part of the reason it took 15 years to complete its work. The resources of the tribunal had to be diverted to meet those challenges, rather than concentrating on the work it was set up to do. The way in which the tribunal was set up did not give sufficient thought to the costs. The costs that were paid to barristers at the outset - €2,250 per day for senior counsel and €1,500 per day for junior counsel - were very generous.

It was only in 2009 and 2010 that these rates of pay were reduced by 16%. However, the rates are still very generous, at €1,760 per day for senior counsel and €1,173 per day for junior counsel. I trust the lesson is that tribunals are not the way to investigate wrongdoing. However, if we must have a tribunal again, I hope there will be narrow terms of reference, a timeframe and much more realistic costs commensurate with the fact that we are in a recession and in great economic distress.

For over 35 years, I was very proud to say I was a teacher. It is different for me now as a politician, public representative and Deputy because, in a sense, we are all tainted by the findings of the tribunal. I know that many public representatives are, like me, honest but great damage has been done to the reputations of those elected because of the view that all politicians are the same. We are not all the same but everyone elected to the Dáil, Seanad and local authorities has a responsibility to ensure there is honesty and integrity in public life.

All our institutions have been tainted. I refer to banking, finance, the church, the State and aspects of the media. I cannot help but wonder whether there is something in the male psyche causing the problem as the institutions are all male dominated. The common denominators are greed, self-interest, massive egos and a sense of self-righteousness. On reading the Mahon tribunal report, it is clear that those named and implicated are guilty in respect of all these traits and that they believe they are above correction and can do what they like.

It is horrifying to read the findings in the Mahon tribunal report because they comprise a damning indictment of our political institutions. I can only describe it as a cancer. There has been a malevolent cancer at the heart of what the tribunal investigated. Like all cancers, there is a need for radical and invasive treatment if it is to be removed.

The findings of the report show that people in elected office did not tell the truth. Fianna Fáil Ministers launched what are described as "extraordinary and unprecedented attacks on the Tribunal" to erode its independence and collapse it. Fianna Fáil is the same party that set it up. A former Minister received money for the benefit of his political party but then used it for his own personal benefit. The report refers to a developer who embraced and adopted the strategy of corruptly engaging with councillors; a developer who made or authorised payments to politicians for their backing on rezoning; politicians seeking and taking payments; abuse by a former Deputy, an elected representative, who corruptly sold political services and abused his position as an elected representatives for his own personal gain; a lobbyist making a significant personal fortune by actively and purposely misleading the tribunal; requests for party donations by two former taoisigh which the tribunal found entirely inappropriate and to constitute an abuse of political power and Government authority; findings of corruption against some 11 councillors; a former Taoiseach who failed to act on information about wrongdoing, yet proceeded to appoint the implicated person as a Minister. The central word in all of this is "abuse", that is, abuse of the office of an elected representative of the people.

One could walk up to the court in the Phoenix Park today and find people being fined or sentenced to jail for minor offences. While I do not condone wrongdoing, I must ask whether any individual named in the tribunal's findings has been punished proportionately. If we examine the punishments to date, we note that four people went to jail. One was sentenced to two years, with six months suspended. One spent eight months in jail and another six weeks.

Central to the findings is the unhealthy relationship between business and politics. This is crony capitalism but it is really corruption. Corruption became so firmly rooted that it appears that it became the way to do business. What happened was that some in elected office had power and used it to make millionaires of friends through very favourable rezoning decisions. Those councillors and Deputies prostituted themselves.

There is more corruption to be unearthed, particularly in respect of the way in which we have sold off our resources of gas and oil to date. Corrib Gas is a prime example. Another pertains to our contention that we charge corporation tax at 12.5%, yet much of this tax is not collected.

The damage to communities cannot be underestimated. The building boom was at the heart of what the Mahon tribunal investigated. I refer to land rezoning, the selling of vital green landscapes and the building of estates solely for profit with no regard for the services needed to make a housing estate into a community. Necessary services include playgrounds, libraries, sports facilities, shops and transport. All the housing developed did not clear the housing waiting list, nor did it see an end to homelessness. The development was utterly profit driven.

Let us consider the reactions of those named in the report. The report states former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern failed to truthfully account for the amounts lodged and that there was no credible explanation of their origin, yet Mr. Ahern stated he never accepted a bribe or corrupt payment. People who testified on Mr. Ahern's behalf under oath had their evidence rejected by the tribunal and they are now taking refuge in the fact that one word, "corrupt", was not used. The developer found by the tribunal to be aware of, and actively engaged in facilitating, the corrupt disbursement of payments to politicians utterly rejects the findings of the tribunal and will be seeking a judicial review.

Let us consider those who looked on. In respect of them, the Mahon tribunal report states corruption continued because nobody was prepared to do enough to stop it. One of the reasons was that those who had the power to stop it were frequently implicated. There was general apathy and not enough pressure on politicians to do anything.

In April 2007, Frank Connolly in the then Mail on Sunday carried an article on Bertie Ahern entitled “Bertie: The Money Trail”. That same morning, Bertie Ahern went to Áras an Uachtaráin to request the dissolution of the Dáil. Revelations about the money trail dominated the first half of the election campaign in 2007. While I agree with the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty, it is remarkable that in Dublin Central in the 2007 election, Bertie Ahern received three times the number of first preferences that my predecessor, the late Tony Gregory, received. Tony Gregory was a man of integrity and honesty. There was evidence in 2007 that was ignored by the Fianna Fáil Party to ensure it would stay in power. However, it was also ignored by the electorate.

The Garda, most unfortunately, is among the organisations that could have done more. Senior gardaí were found to have failed to properly investigate allegations of corruption and bribery involving senior officials and politicians. Certain sections of the media seemed to have been having a love affair with Bertie Ahern and there was no criticism allowed. The Fianna Fáil Party and its members had collective responsibility because what was occurring had been occurring for a long time. It is still disturbing to listen to and read comments by constituents of Mr. Pádraig Flynn and Mr. Bertie Ahern outlining all they did for their constituencies while disregarding the damage they and their cohorts did for the country.

One must acknowledge those who did something. Mr. Michael Smith and Mr. Colm Mac Eochaidh saw corruption and wanted to do something about it. Certain journalists persevered doggedly and some continued in the face of personal attacks on them and their reputations. It was interesting to read about Mr. Trevor Sargent of the Green Party having tried to expose corruption at a council meeting by producing a cheque from a developer. I believe he had to be escorted from the chamber for his own protection.

Can we hope for lessons to be learned? Can we say "Never again", mean it and set about putting in motion what is necessary to root out corruption and get to the point where one can say with pride that one is a Deputy, Senator or councillor?

The Mahon report recommends that politicians who are convicted of corruption or who have failed to explain adequately their sources of income be stripped of their pensions. It recommends that other planning investigations be reopened, not by the tribunal but by a group of independent planning experts; that the CAB, the DPP and Revenue Commissioners continue to do their work; that an end be put to the massive tax reliefs for developers and to political donations; that there be a ban on gifts; and that non-co-operative witnesses pay their own costs and the costs of the tribunal. It is also recommended that there be rigorous and transparent planning regulations, which means reform of local government to ensure there are no more deals on rezoning. This means an independent planning regulator. Standards in public office ought to be more rigorous and there should be a register of lobbyists. The report recommends also that the Kenny report be implemented in full. The investigation behind this report began in 1971 and the report was published in 1974, and it called for an effective end to land speculation.

It was disquieting to listen yesterday to Deputy Martin speaking in the House. While he acknowledged wrongdoing, it seemed to have been a case of his saying, "Moriarty found out more about you than Mahon did about us." That is not the way forward. The way forward is to say we will never let what occurred happen again, mean this and take action to ensure it.

I had the honour of being elected to this House in 1987. Throughout my time here, the spectre of corruption has hung over political life. While endemic to the system, it has not been endemic to all parties. The role played by Labour Party and other councillors during this period in opposing the prostitution of the planning process in county Dublin in particular has not been afforded ample recognition. A price was paid for that opposition. Opposition to the planning process was often successfully portrayed as opposition to development and the sting was considerable. The mantra was often, "Support us and our plans or oppose the economic well-being of your constituents". At a time when there is rightly considerable cynicism about politics, the consistent and honourable approach of some is worthy of mention. I am proud to be now standing by one of those people, Deputy Joan Burton. As the Tánaiste indicated last night while corruption may have infected all levels of political life, it did not affect all parties. This is primarily a Fianna Fáil problem. Like Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan, I am disappointed with Deputy Martin's response last night. Finger pointing and "What About You" are no response to the crisis his party is rightfully facing. To be honest, I expected more.

I want to concentrate on how we can address some of the issues this report gives rise to, issues that must be addressed if we are to restore some trust in politics. This is not the first time my party has led a response to the misdoings of others. In the aftermath of the beef tribunal we led the political charge on ethics legislation and controls on electoral spending. Those reforms are noted by the Mahon tribunal. Now in the areas of whistleblowing, freedom of information, ethics and the regulation of lobbyists we need to go further.

The original legislation under which tribunals of inquiry operate - the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921 - predates the establishment of the State. As noted by the 2005 Law Reform Commission report on public inquiries, the tribunal of inquiry legislation was in fact put in place originally to investigate allegations of political corruption. In the early years of the State the tribunals of inquiry mechanism was utilised to inquire into a broad diversity of policy issues, as well as quasi-criminal matters. The process was also used in the aftermath of what might be termed "disaster". As the final decade of the last century unfolded, however, tribunals of inquiry increasingly became and now remain synonymous in the public mind and in popular culture with the purpose for which the legislation was initially passed, namely to inquire into allegations of political corruption. It is a matter of the most profound political regret and most serious public concern that following the publication of this recent report we find ourselves marking in this House yet another milestone in a litany of tribunal reports - the beef tribunal, McCracken, Moriarty and now Mahon.

Despite the voluminous information provided in the final report of the Mahon tribunal, analysed in forensic detail over 2,730 pages, the second paragraph of the first page of the introductory section of the report provides us with one stark overriding conclusion, widely-reported and almost chilling in its brevity: "Throughout the period examined by the tribunal up to the late 1990s, corruption in Irish political life was both endemic and systemic". The findings of the Mahon tribunal, following from those tribunals which preceded it, inevitably raises some far-reaching and searching questions for the political system in the first instance, but also for its administrative, regulatory, law enforcement and judicial systems, as well as for the Fourth Estate, the media, and indeed for society more generally. We cannot expect to find facile answers to what are in certain instances deep-seated and entrenched problems. Neither can we afford when faced with some uncomfortable and unpalatable truths to allow ourselves lapse into passivity or a sense of perceived powerlessness. Rather the findings of this report must provide further impetus and momentum to the delivery of key elements of the Government's existing political reform programme which in several important respects echo some of the major recommendations of the tribunal.

The report should also encourage us, as already is evidenced by the Government's response to it, to review the case for deepening and intensifying various reform commitments contained in the programme for Government that can help deal decisively and definitively with some of the legislative gaps and regulatory weaknesses that permitted the abuses and serious malfeasance disclosed by the tribunal of inquiry to flourish. It is equally important we adopt an entirely objective, balanced and clear-sighted perspective on the findings of the report. It is striking and highly significant that in the opening page of the final report, directly following the over-arching conclusion to which I have already referred, the tribunal also stresses the majority of public officials perform their functions with the utmost integrity. This is an important point to be acknowledged.

There can, of course, be no doubt whatsoever that the findings of this report have done significant damage to the reputation of and public trust in the political system. However, in vigorously condemning the corruption, abuse of office and significant ethical lapses disclosed in the tribunal's report and in taking all necessary and appropriate steps to prevent their recurrence, it is imperative that we do not fall victim to pessimism and despondency regarding ethical standards in the public service and among holders of public office which is properly characterised in the tribunal's report as the mistaken assumption that, to quote the report, "everyone is doing it". I believe the enduring threat to public confidence in the legitimacy, basic decency and integrity of our political and administrative system resides not in the findings of this report, as serious as they are relating to specific instances of corrupt behaviour and unreliable and unbelievable testimony. Rather, it lies in what seems sometimes, almost routinely, to be accepted as a conventional wisdom denying there is a clear and navigable way forward in fixing what has been demonstrably wrong. It can also be manifested, dispiritingly, in strident declarations that we have heard from some that the State is morally bankrupt and its political culture rotten.

Such sentiments are to a certain extent understandable in the immediate aftermath of a tribunal report whose findings were so damning in particular respects. They are also often borne out of a deep frustration and pronounced fatigue regarding the slow pace of political reform, particularly evident over the past decade following a period of significant political reforms including, for example, the introduction of Freedom of Information legislation in 1997, the Electoral Act in 1997 and the Ethics Acts of 1995, all under the last Labour Government.

Ultimately, the final report of the tribunal itself stated: "Those who believe that those in the public sphere are corrupt do a great disservice to these individuals. In addition, they may inadvertently contribute to corruption by both dissuading those of high integrity from entering public office". Some of the main initiatives which I am actively progressing in my Department include the introduction of whistleblowing legislation, the regulation of lobbyists, the restoration and extension of freedom of information and the examination of how accountability requirements for the Civil Service can be strengthened. I will bring greater detail of these to the various committees involved in introducing them. This is a comprehensive programme and one to which my Department is totally committed. Some may use this report to fuel further opposition to politics and the political process. Phrases like "they are all at it" have been music to the ears of wrongdoers over the years. However, we in political life would do well to reflect on why such frustration abounds amongst the public. Ultimately, it is because it is perceived there is insufficient accounting for wrongdoing.

It is not simply about this report or previous reports about political issues. There has been no adequate accounting for the crisis that has impoverished the State and its people. Not only have those responsible not been punished, if that is appropriate, they have not even been stood up and asked to explain themselves.

The line between the Executive and those that prosecute offences is clear and understood. Nonetheless, the public has a right to expect the State ensures wrongdoing, by whomsoever, carries consequences and penalties.

I welcome much of what the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has said, particularly his proposed programme of reforms which I was pleased to hear him announce. I endorse the sentiments expressed by the Fianna Fáil Deputies who have addressed this matter already. In particular, I support the actions that have been taken by our party leader, Deputy Martin. In the introduction of its report, the tribunal referred to certain statements by Ministers during its proceedings that it believed were calculated to undermine or collapse it. Some sections of the media have attributed one such statement to me, but the tribunal did not name the individuals to whom it was referring. If the tribunal regards my statement as too flippant, harsh or disrespectful, I regret making it. However, in no way was I seeking to undermine or collapse the tribunal's work, nor was I acting in concert with my colleagues or anyone else.

My position on these matters was set out comprehensively in a speech that I gave in the Dáil on 30 January 2008. Like the many people throughout the country, including those I represent, whose taxes were paying for the tribunal, I was concerned by the length of time that it was taking and the consequent cost. I referred to Mr. Justice Flood's interim report, in which he acknowledged the need for urgency. When he formed the opinion that continued questioning would not resolve conflicts of evidence, he stated so and moved on. I dared to suggest that his successor should follow that precedent. Logically, if my criticism of the urgency with which the tribunal was proceeding undermined the tribunal, it was equally undermined by Mrs. Justice Denham in her judgment in a case arising from the Mahon tribunal on 4 July 2007. She stated: "The fact that the tribunal is still inquiring ten years later is the antithesis of an urgent public inquiry."

Former Fine Gael Minister and distinguished jurist, the late Professor John Kelly, argued in his authoritative work on the Constitution that "criticism of the Courts is permissible". That quotation can be found on page 933 of the latest edition of his seminal work. Professor Kelly quoted various legal cases and judgments in support of his proposition that, not only should people be allowed to criticise the courts, but that such criticism should be welcomed. If it is permissible to criticise the courts without undermining their authority, surely it is permissible to criticise a tribunal similarly.

If some found my criticism unacceptable, how would they regard the criticisms of various superior court judges in various cases taken during the course of the tribunal? For example, in the 2004 O'Callaghan v. Judge Alan Mahon & ors case, the High Court declared that certain procedures of the tribunal amounted to “a failure to observe and protect the applicant’s rights to fair procedures and to natural and constitutional justice”. What about Mr. Justice Hardiman of the Supreme Court who stated in open court that the tribunal’s procedures were “extraordinarily unfair” and that there was a reasonable inference that the tribunal had “prejudged vital issues” or “suppressed” certain materials? What about his comment in the same judgment where he referred to the “profoundly flawed nature of the Tribunal’s procedures and its insensitivity to the requirements of justice which that produced”? My remark, however flippant it may have been, pales into significance by comparison. I have not quoted these judgments to attack the tribunal further, but to put my remark in the context of the ponderous declarations of superior court judges and to show that, had my remark been calculated or served to undermine the tribunal, it would have been further undermined by those.

Not only did I enthusiastically support the establishment of the tribunal, I supported its efforts at all times to discover the truth about the corruption in the planning process. Several times while I had the privilege of sitting around the Cabinet table, the Government of the day received various requests from the tribunal for assistance of one type or another. I readily supported all such requests, as my then Cabinet colleagues will be aware. Nor did I act in some form of conspiracy with anybody. A few times, the Government Press Office asked if I would give a media interview concerning the workings of the tribunal. I agreed to do so when I was available. I informed no other colleague in advance of giving those interviews, nor did colleagues inform me of interviews they gave. A number of times, the media contacted me directly and I agreed to speak with them without consulting anybody. Given the fact that I went on record quite a bit concerning the tribunal, I am amazed that the national broadcaster, RTE, which has a well deserved reputation for balance and a lack of bias, could only find one statement.

Sinn Féin criticised me in the House and accused me of making an incorrect statement concerning what it called an honest and honourable man. I admit that I was incorrect and I paid a heavy price, but I dispute the claim that my statement was about an honourable and decent man. I wish to lay down a marker, in that I will take no criticism on standards from the spawn of murderers, robbers, extortionists and purveyors of every sort of crime imaginable. When Sinn Féin of all parties talks about standards, it sticks in my craw.

The report's findings are public. I accept them and urge the Government to act immediately on the report's recommendations. I was delighted when the Minister, Deputy Howlin, confirmed that this was his intention. I have no difficulty with any of the tribunal's recommendations. They should be implemented as quickly as possible. The only reservation I have is about whether the recommendations on their own will be sufficient to ensure that these practices do not recur. In this regard, it would be of considerable assistance if the various organs of State to which the Government rightly referred the report took decisive action as quickly as possible against the various people whose actions have been condemned therein.

It is difficult for somebody from outside Dublin to comprehend the full extent of the corruption in respect of rezonings and planning permissions in the Dublin area. I represent an urban area, although a much smaller one, that required a fair amount of land rezoning as the suburbs spread out from the 1970s onwards. However, there was not a hint of anything similar to that which occurred in Dublin. The former Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Mr. Gormley, instituted an investigation into planning practices in five local authorities before he left office. Whatever the dispute about the facts, the current Minister should institute an independent inquiry into the matters in question. I do not recall the then Minister's decision being discussed at Cabinet. Perhaps it occurred after I had left the Government, but there must have been at least some basis for it. In light of the type of activity revealed in the report of the Mahon tribunal, surely we should leave no stone unturned to ensure that the process in each local authority area is beyond reproach.

The Mahon report is not the only tribunal report that we have to hand. It has been more than a year since the Moriarty tribunal made a series of recommendations that have not as yet been implemented. Although Harold Wilson stated that a week could be a long time in politics, I realise that a year can be a short time in politics, particularly in the case of a new Government that has had many other issues on its mind. However, the Government has both reports to hand. I earnestly urge it to implement all of their recommendations with the greatest possible speed and to do whatever else is necessary to ensure that the integrity of the planning system is beyond reproach.

I agree with Deputy O'Dea, in that the greatest scandal perpetrated in Ireland was the armed struggle conducted by the IRA and Sinn Féin against the people of this country, including the many thousands who were killed, injured or had their lives destroyed.

The Mahon tribunal paints a picture of corruption and abuse of power endemic in politics, primarily in Fianna Fáil. The tribunal found that former Fianna Fáil Taoiseach Bertie Ahern had been untruthful, that former EU Commissioner and Fianna Fáil Minister Pádraig Flynn was corrupt, that former Fianna Fáil Taoiseach Albert Reynolds abused power, that former Fianna Fáil member Liam Lawlor abused his role as a public representative, that former Fianna Fáil Government press secretary Frank Dunlop made corrupt payments for developers to secure planning, and that the Cork-based developer Owen O'Callaghan made or authorised corrupt payments to politicians for their support.

While the picture painted by the Mahon tribunal is shocking, it is not surprising to anyone who sat on the old Dublin County Council as I did in the early 1990s. It merely confirms what I and many other Labour members of the council, including our leader, Frank Buckley, Eithne Fitzgerald and Mervyn Taylor, suspected at the time. It will not come as a surprise to the journalists who covered the carry on in Dublin County Council and elsewhere during that period. I now know why the Labour Party did not succeed in preventing the planning disaster that to this day leaves certain communities bereft of the facilities they paid for when they purchased or rented their houses. It was because greedy developers sought to corrupt greedy politicians and because greedy politicians, mainly from Fianna Fáil, sought to extort brown paper envelopes from developers. The result was poor planing and devastated communities.

These communities paid on the double under the Fianna Fáil regime for sites for schools and other infrastructure. The developers picked up the options on sites that would become schools for next to nothing. The land was then rezoned and by the time the school site was purchased the price had risen to more than €500,000 per acre. In many of the schools in Dublin West, children are urged to walk during play time because there is no space for playing and running. That is the price the children of developed areas around County Dublin, including my constituency, continue to pay.

The Mahon tribunal report shows that money is the biggest persuader. This is why Labour Party councillors were not successful in their argument for proper planning. Development was inevitable as the city grew but the question was how to strike the balance in order to reap a social dividend for those who bought or rented houses in the new areas.

The Mahon tribunal report is only one of many reports which have uncovered dodgy dealings at the interface between business and politics. Some of these reports merely confirmed what was already reported by journalists, several of whom have been silenced as a result of libel threats from powerful people anxious to avoid a media spotlight on their secretive dealings. I know a bit about this because I have been threatened with 42 libel actions. The purpose of these threats was to threaten, silence and cost journalists and people like me. As Deputy O'Dea will be aware, even replying to their demands cost several hundred pounds. Sometimes people can be blasé about the exercise of limitations to freedom of expression.

In 1974, Joe McAnthony reported in the Sunday Independent that Ray Burke, then a newly elected Fianna Fáil Deputy, had received £15,000 for his role in rezoning certain lands in Swords. However, Mr. Burke was not forced to resign until 1997 and it was not until 2002 that the Flood tribunal found that he had received corrupt payments from developers and others. He eventually served time in prison for tax offences.

Reports by journalists such as Matt Cooper, Cliff Taylor, Frank Connolly, Frank McDonald, Mark Brannock and Sam Smyth on payments to politicians were in many cases roundly denied by the alleged donors and beneficiaries. The McCracken tribunal, the Flood tribunal, the Moriarty tribunal and, now, the Mahon tribunal found that in many cases there was a sound basis for these reports. This is not to ignore that the vast majority of politicians from all parties and none are absolutely honest in their dealings. The people named in these reports have damaged the good name of politics in Ireland. A certain few of those named and shamed eventually served time in prison but many others returned to business as usual without suffering serious consequences. It outrages ordinary citizens to see successive scandals being uncovered at enormous taxpayer expense and the same characters and plot lines popping up repeatedly.

The Moriarty tribunal was established in 1997 to investigate the financial affairs of the former Taoiseach, Charles Haughey, and the former Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications, Deputy Lowry. The tribunal's final report, which was published last year, detailed the investigation into possible links between a businessman, Denis O'Brien, and Deputy Lowry, who awarded the second mobile telephone licence to Mr. O'Brien's consortium in 1995. The report stated: "it is beyond doubt that...Mr. Lowry imparted substantive information to Mr. O'Brien, of significant value and assistance to him in securing the licence". The report also found that Mr. O'Brien made or facilitated payments to Mr. Lowry of a combined STG£447,000 and support for a loan of £420,000. The Taoiseach stated at the time of the report's publication that the tribunal had found seriously and serially against Deputy Lowry and others who are major players in Irish business and public life. He rightly referred the report to the Garda Commissioner, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Revenue Commissioners.

There has been considerable public and political unease about the fact that Mr. O'Brien has continued to pop up at various public events, most recently at the New York Stock Exchange. However, the Taoiseach was invited to attend that stock exchange event. The organisers of the event not the Office of the Taoiseach decided who was on the balcony for the bell ringing ceremony. It is perhaps time for the Government to reflect on how it should in future interact with people against whom adverse findings have been made by tribunals.

We do not want to return to the days of, "uno Duce, una voce”, the immortal phrase which the former Fianna Fáil press secretary P. J. Mara, himself a tribunal veteran, used to describe Charles Haughey, nor do we want a Burlusconi style media political complex with its attendant codes of omertà undermining the principles of transparent democracy. In this regard I welcome the statement by my colleague, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, on the introduction of legislation to deal with the registration of lobbyists, ethics for public representatives and office holders and transparency in public life. We should look back to the 1830s in the United Kingdom and the great reform Acts which were introduced to clean up politics and end the rotten boroughs for election to Parliament.

We live in a Republic and the representation of each citizen should be what counts rather than the amount of money a particular citizen can spend. We can look forward to a period of reform in which this Government will change the political landscape and our capacity to report and hold to account lobbyists.

The Ten Commandments prohibited murder and envy but they did not put an end to sin. Similarly, this House needs to legislate for transparency and accountability from all elected representatives and office holders.

The Mahon tribunal is banana republic stuff. Those who held office ran the planning system as if it was a commercial enterprise that functioned solely for their private profit. Developers colluded with politicians to allow the private exploitation of the State and the public of Ireland are paying the price. Last week the Labour Party stated it has a proud record of standing up and speaking out against what has now been proven by the Mahon tribunal report to have been corrupt practices. It continued to sing its own praises because it expelled a councillor in 1993, it dealt with the issues as they arose and had what it termed a "proud record in planning matters". It used the word "proactive" to describe itself in reference to dealing with such matters. Labour was certainly proactive when it came to supporting the block by the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, of any independent review into planning irregularities in Dublin and Cork city councils, and Galway, Meath, Cork and Carlow county councils since it went in to government.

The Mahon tribunal dealt with only one local authority. We have no notion of what else exists and the Government has a duty to ensure that we find out. As the Mahon report stated:

Corruption thrives in shadows and darkness. Consequently anti-corruption measures must focus on ensuring transparency and accountability in public life. Ignorance and apathy are both corruption catalysts. Therefore, anti-corruption measures must be supported from the top-down and from the bottom up.

Part of these anti-corruption measures must be finding out what went on elsewhere, because otherwise the perception of political corruption being pervasive will call into question the legitimacy of the political institutions of the State.

We all remember what happened with the Centre for Public Inquiry. This non-governmental body was established in 2005 to investigate matters of public importance in Irish political, public and corporate life. Frank Connolly was executive director, and the Members of this House should praise his work, considering it was his investigations in to former Minister Ray Burke that led to the establishment of the planning and payments tribunal and the Morris tribunal. Following a smear campaign conducted against Frank Connolly and the centre itself by the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Michael McDowell, the rabid right-wing attack dog of the Fianna Fáil-led Government, and helped by the Sunday Independent, which was no stranger in attempting to undermine the Mahon tribunal, the centre was forced to close when its funding was withdrawn by Chuck Feeney of Atlantic Philanthropies.

Chuck Feeney met the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, in August of 2005 during which they discussed the work of the centre and its executive director, including - presumably - the allegations about Mr. Connolly, who has not been charged with anything. The final nail in the Centre for Public Inquiry's coffin was the threat of legal action on a report it was preparing which raised very serious questions as to why the State-owned Dublin Port Company did not go through tender procedures before going in to a joint venture with private operators. The Dublin Port Company was, of course, chaired by then Councillor Joe Burke, a close associate of none other than the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern. Bertie Ahern's contributions to the Mahon tribunal were less than truthful and yet he still arrogantly hawks his protests in the media about how he was hard done by by the tribunal. The people of this country are hard done by. More than €300 million was spent with no tangible results. Heads should roll but the people are still waiting to see if they will roll. It is hard to imagine heads rolling judging by the history of previous Governments in this country.

In its conclusion the report refers to the corrosive and destructive impact of corruption on society. Not only does it undermine the democratic process, but it has also damaging social effects. We can see that by considering some of the planning decisions that were made in Dublin where communities were housed not on the basis of proper planning for communities' needs but solely on the basis of who owned the land and what companies and individuals were involved. That corruption did not begin with the events of the individuals dealt with in the report. It dates back to the 1960s and involves several leading members of the Fianna Fáil Party. That created a culture of corruption in which many of those who rose to prominence regarded their elected positions and positions held in government as a licence to earn large amounts of money by selling their influence and votes.

Of course, that extended beyond planning and we must assume that if a nexus of corruption existed between property, land and politics, other aspects of commercial life were also affected. The Moriarty report lifted the veil on some of that regarding the mobile phone licences. There are also strong grounds for believing that significant concessions to other businesses were made because certain people were involved in an unhealthy relationship with businesses which benefitted from tax and other concessions. We know some of that from what we know of what was going on in the beef industry.

It is also no coincidence that several of the stars of the Mahon and other reports on planning corruption were also involved in other murky areas. At the time of the Flood report which dealt with Ray Burke, I called for its remit to be extended into other areas where Ray Burke had significant influence and where questionable decisions had been made to the benefit of big business. I specifically referred in that context to the changes that had been made to the revenue and licensing terms given to the oil and gas exploration companies. Those changes have subsequently been defended even by former critics in the Labour Party on the basis that they make economic sense. Not only do they not make economic sense but the reasons they were changed had nothing to do with the economics of oil and gas exploration. At least they did not have anything to do with the economic interests of this State and its citizens.

We are all well aware of the Galway tent and that for X thousand pounds a person could sit and have a chat with a Minister. I raised the matter in this House on numerous occasions. I also asked what contribution Enterprise Oil gave to the Fianna Fáil Party or to Fianna Fáil members. I challenge Fianna Fáil to state what that party and its members received from the oil companies. There are mucky waters there. Issuing licences to companies at a vastly reduced rate should be investigated. There is an onus on the Fianna Fáil leadership to state what it got from Enterprise Oil and other oil companies and there is also an onus on the oil companies to disclose what they gave to Fianna Fáil and their involvement in the Galway tent.

The changes made to the revenue and licensing terms benefited the companies and continue to benefit them. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility to suggest that they benefitted certain individuals who were central to implementing those changes. At the very least that deserves investigation as does the close relationship between Fianna Fáil in government and certain of the beneficiaries of the Corrib deal.

In all of the cases of proven or suspected corruption the citizens of the State pay the price in terms of bad planning, social decay and the loss of economic benefits. That destroys the myth that was put about by some people that the takers of bribes and the dispensers of favours were in some way oiling the wheels of the economy. It is clear that they were not. It is also apparent that corrupt politicians complemented corrupt businessmen and speculators. That relationship flourished during the years of the Celtic tiger for which some of those politicians claimed much of the credit.

This report proves that not only were they parasites feeding off the property boom, but that they were also implementing decisions that in the end had harmful - one might say catastrophic - effects on this society. There is little doubt that the speculative frenzy and all that went with that including Anglo Irish Bank were in large part fuelled by corruption.

Corruption has always existed in political life across the world. Everybody is aware of how Tammany Hall and what happened in Chicago in the 1920s completely corrupted the political system. In this debate we are discussing individuals who have been named in the Mahon report as well as the overall system and what went on in Irish politics in those years. The general consensus is that the era of Charles Haughey changed corruption from a crime into organised crime. Like organised crime whether it exists in the corruption of politics or in criminal activities, it passes most people by in the majority of cases. People are unaware of the corrosive influence of organised crime or the organised corruption that took place during the past 50 years and how destructive it can be on society. One benefit of reports such as the Mahon tribunal report is that they demonstrate how destructive organised corruption in Irish political life has been during the past half a century. We must ask ourselves how this came about, how aware we were of what occurred in our society in recent years and what was done about it.

Several speakers have already commented on certain press releases and the work of journalists and individuals who stepped forward and suggested this was going on in our political life. However, it appears nothing was done about it. We must ask ourselves whether corruption in Irish political life took second place to other concerns of the people. Why did the people vote Bertie Ahern back into power for three terms when issues were raised about his finances during the course of most of his second term and his third term as Taoiseach? Nevertheless, he was voted into power by the people. We must ask ourselves how such a scenario came about when people were shouting from the rafters about what was going on in his private life. We must ask ourselves how pervasive this corruption was. Was it a case of the sins of a few? Was it simply a few people, including some developers, speculators, lobbyists and corrupt politicians, who exploited a rather docile and naive political system in the country to make vast amounts of money for themselves? Did these people simply come together at the right time like the perfect storm and exploit the resources of the country for their uses?

It is necessary for us to delve a little deeper into it. We will make political attacks on each other in the House about who is more corrupt, who claims to be innocent and who is not so innocent. However, we must ask ourselves how this situation came about. One possible conclusion is that there is systemic corruption in Irish public life. We must not for one moment take the view that corruption exists only in the case of politicians. We must remember certain officials and public servants have been named in reports for participating in this behaviour. If there is a systemic acceptance of corruption in our public system from politicians and the leadership of political parties downwards, then there is a serious problem, a problem legislation alone will not solve. There is need for us to debate these matters. We must not simply attack each other politically. There is a need for us to move on from the Mahon tribunal and to delve into our society, the political system and the ethos of public life and to examine our perceptions.

Last night, I attended a discussion in Trinity College, Dublin on the Seanad. A comment was made to the effect that we need civic participation in every institution in the State in order that the public can trust and have confidence in them. We must get this message to the public. We must instigate civic participation.

I first heard about Liam Lawlor during the mid-1980s. An aunt of mine who lived in Dublin saw him on a television news programme. She laughed and suggested one could build a piggery in the middle of the Phoenix Park if one paid that man enough money. Nevertheless, it took years before anything came of it. She was not politically involved yet she knew all about Liam Lawlor and Charlie Haughey. Despite this, we had to spend millions of euro on inquiries to find out what every dog in the street knew.

There has been a mockery of the political system in recent years. The former Minister with responsibility for justice went up every tree in north Dublin looking for corruption but could find none. There was mockery of our political system when the then Taoiseach made Liam Lawlor chairperson of the ethics committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Since he had his tentacles on everything that happened politically in the city, the then Taoiseach would have known there were concerns about Liam Lawlor. This was the sort of corruption that took place in public life. It is associated with Fianna Fáil because that party was in power for 22 of the past 30 years. It held the levers of power in the country. When the corruption became endemic within the Fianna Fáil Party it had a disastrous knock-on effect for everyone in the country.

It is only right that the Fianna Fáil Party should examine what happened. Many of those involved although not corrupt were complacent. There was also a defensive attitude from many in the leadership of Fianna Fáil. They should have acted differently and more appropriately within their party at the time and they failed to do so. Some of the people who failed to act appropriately at the time represent the current leadership of Fianna Fáil, including Deputy Micheál Martin and Deputy Willie O'Dea. Such individuals have a good deal to answer for. They cannot hide behind suggestions that they did not know or that it should be left to the tribunal. I have no view about whether they were undermining the tribunal but they undermined public trust and confidence in the political and public Administration of the country by their carry-on during the past decade. As a result, they no longer have the confidence of the people. They cannot stand up and speak as if they were somehow disconnected from events. Unfortunately, they have no credibility and they must face up to this.

It is only right that Bertie Ahern comes in for significant criticism in the report. My former colleague in the Seanad, Eugene Regan, made a strong point and raised this issue when he was in the Seanad. He took the view that all the prevarication and justifications from senior ministers at the time were having a corrosive influence on people's views about politicians and the credibility of the Houses of the Oireachtas. This is coming through now and this is people's view of us now. Bertie Ahern was elected Taoiseach of the country in 2007 without a tax clearance certificate. He denied this and he hinted in his distinctive way with smoke and daggers that his legal affairs were in order. In fact, it transpired that he had no tax clearance certificate and that he was in discussions with Revenue Commissioners with regard to moneys he received in the 1990s. This was made perfectly clear in the Seanad. Mr. Regan wrote to the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, and the Revenue Commissioners but nothing was done about it by Mr. Ahern's colleagues in Government. They hid behind legal arguments and the tribunal. The result was that they undermined the authority of the Oireachtas and the Seanad and the public system in the country.

When people give out about politicians and public administrations and the institutions of State it is because some individuals in the country were corrupt to the core and destroyed trust in the system. Some of their colleagues in political parties made half-hearted justifications for these individuals and they allowed themselves to peddle the argument that we should hide behind legalistic jargon and argument and wait for the tribunals to report. The position we find ourselves in today is regrettable. Some of the individuals involved should be more honest with themselves and the people they represent.

With their corruption, people such as Charlie Haughey, Liam Lawlor and Ray Burke had an all-pervasive and corrosive influence on our public system. I first heard of these individuals in the late 1980s. I had to watch them throughout the 1990s. Then I came to the House and I had to listen to the arguments put forward to justify their behaviour. I hope that civic society and the people on the street have turned their backs completely on this behaviour. We must not allow ourselves to become complacent or to accept the smoky arguments put forward that such a person did not know this or that or did not realise it was so bad. We must not allow that to come forth. We must do our best to clear corruption from public life. We will do our best on this side of the House to get the legislation right.

We also need ordinary men and women to reconnect with the political system. We need them to say this type of behaviour is unacceptable and must be thrown out. When Albert Reynolds, for example, allowed Pádraig Flynn to resume a position in Cabinet, he became a part of the system more through complacency than through outright corruption. That was unfortunate and many others were like that. While they were not corrupt as individuals, their complacency towards corruption undermined the system further. We must take this on board and never let this happen again. We must put a stop to it straight away.

The Mahon report's revelation that corruption operated on such a large scale in public life was of little surprise to the majority of people in Ireland. In fact, the many people to whom I have spoken over the past number of days believe the Mahon tribunal only dealt with what floated on the surface and that we will never know the full extent of corruption in Irish political life during those times. It is terrible that some of these people say and believe that all politicians are corrupt. As a councillor and a mayor in my time, I have dealt with many decent and honourable politicians from all parties and they have not been corrupt.

This damning report, which took almost 15 years to conclude, is to me a definition of the greed and corruption of a small group of politicians. The record of their gluttony forms the backdrop to the impoverished life many people live today. The cost of the tribunal and the fact that our jails are not overflowing with corrupt politicians or developers will leave a bitter taste for many people and may cause them to wonder what the tribunal was all about. For me, it is this House that will ultimately determine whether the Mahon report was worth the wait. We are the ones who can opt to shake our heads and condemn the past or be proactive and introduce legislation that will restore people's faith in politics.

One of the first things we should do is to support fully the calls for a change in legislation to allow politicians found guilty of taking bribes to be stripped of their lucrative pensions. The majority of people would back that. If people are found guilty of such practices, the State has the right to ensure they do not receive generous payments. This is only reasonable. These corrupt payments have brought costs on the people. If a constitutional referendum is required to deal in this manner with the people named in the Mahon tribunal, let it be held. Every Deputy should support that if we wish to restore respectability to the body politic. We must ensure that people who have acted corruptly cannot walk away without paying some price.

It is deeply regrettable that Deputies and Senators are not covered by the existing legislation, which is approximately 120 years old. The House needs to move without delay to extend the remit of the Public Bodies Corrupt Practice Act to cover the case of bribery involving current and future Oireachtas Members. This would send a message to the public that we are serious about what we are doing. There is no reason to delay the implementation of such a measure. Any Deputy who has the gall to ask people to fork out €100 for the household charge without first doing everything in his or her power to bring about change to the anti-corruption legislation should hang his or her head in shame. We are talking about an Act that dates back 120 years. People will no longer accept that there can be one rule for one and another for others. If someone has been found guilty of corruption in politics, a price must be paid.

The Mahon report will go down in history as a permanent reminder of the damage that Fianna Fáil has done to this country. The party's pivotal role in planning and corruption has led - through bribes to local councillors, the construction of tens of thousands of houses for which there were no buyers in a sprawl around the country and the 110% mortgages involved in the banking collapse - to economic Armageddon here. The links between Fianna Fáil and the property developers brought about a policy of encouraging property development, to the detriment of other spheres of economic activity, and ultimately to the property bubble from which the fallout now costs the State tens of millions. It is much more expensive to provide infrastructure and services to these homes. More thought should be given to this and to the extra costs which will run to hundreds of millions. In addition, the housing sprawl has encouraged car-dependent commuting, with negative environmental, social and economic effects costing hundreds of millions. This is all a result of the high level of corruption in Irish politics.

Sometimes corruption is seen as a victimless crime. However, that is not the case when we think of the quality of life of hundreds of thousands of people who have been immensely affected because of the cross-party systematic corruption in planning highlighted by the Mahon tribunal. Corruption was not exclusive to Fianna Fáil, although it excelled at it. However, I would like to emphasise that, as I said, I have worked with many good politicians from all parties, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Labour Party included, who were not corrupt but who were decent people.

We need a comprehensive policy review to advise on a new system capable of delivering productive outcomes. Even in the hands of the less virtuous, a rational response to the evidence of wholesale corruption in the planning process would involve a fundamental review of the 1963 Act and its numerous successors. We need to do this. I also call on the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to rethink his decision to shut down independent inquiries into local authority planning irregularities. If we are to have any credibility, we must ensure every avenue is investigated in order that we do not face another tribunal in five or ten years time, as that would be the death knell to respect for politics and would lead people to believe all politicians are corrupt.

In the aftermath of the Mahon report, we as elected officials have a grave duty to restore the political system to its rightful functions and respect. Previous tribunals have catalogued the bribery of politicians, but did not lead to the conviction of a single developer or businessman. Many people are outraged by that. There was a public outcry when a succession of Ministers were shown to have benefited from blatantly unethical, if not corrupt, payments. To my knowledge, the three people found guilty by their actions as a result of previous reports - Ray Burke, Frank Dunlop and George Redmond - are still in receipt of generous State pensions. This brings us back to my initial point that we must introduce legislation that will ensure people found corrupt cannot receive those pensions.

To mean anything, the tribunal report must lead to reform in our political and administrative decisions and bring about rules of conduct that work and must be obeyed. In the absence of an effective criminal justice system and penal sanctions, commercial interests will continue to offer bribes. There is no question about this. They will not stop now and if they see a way out and a way to use their influence with politicians, they will do that. They will continue to do this until we bring in proper legislation to stop them. The Mahon report suggested that power given to authorities at the front line of corruption prevention and control should be given the credence it deserves. Simplified complaints procedures, more resources for the Standards in Public Office Commission, a broader definition of donation and the establishment of a planning regulator would go a long way towards restoring the public's confidence. I hope this Government, which has the largest majority in the history of the State, will move quickly to introduce such greater checks and balances. The decision to refer the report to the Garda Commissioner, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Revenue Commissioners and the Standards in Public Office Commission is very welcome. However, there should be speedy action to strengthen the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in tackling corruption. If the Criminal Assets Bureau is to stand for anything, then it must surely have a role in this regard and this option should be closely examined.

In the wake of the report there should be proper trials and prosecutions for those who declared themselves public servants but who in effect undermined the State. Suspended sentences and slaps on the back of the hand will not cut it with the general public. One of the most serious allegations in the report is that several members of the former Cabinet attempted to impede and bring down the tribunal. The fact that members of the Government would attack and attempt to undermine the work of the tribunal of inquiry inquiring into corruption in public life is deeply disturbing. I agree with some of the previous speakers that we need to hear a lot more from Fianna Fáil and, in particular, from their sitting Deputies who were in Government at the time. They have all been pretty quiet about it.

The 1963 Act and its numerous successors must be examined in order to ensure the confidence of the ordinary people. There is a perception that all politicians are at it. I refer to a cartoon in a newspaper last week which showed a person fishing and catching a sprat with the word "corruption" written on it while underneath the water lurked a huge shark captioned, "the others". This is the common perception, rightly or wrongly, and we have an opportunity to change that.

As a Member from Sligo and as a fellow Sligoman, I will concentrate in my contribution on the issue of Tom Gilmartin and the treatment dished out to a man who arrived back to Ireland in the late 1980s and who wished to invest in the country of his birth. The tribunal stated and agreed that Mr. Gilmartin had a legitimate interest in business and property development in and around Dublin. Mr. Gilmartin hoped to put together a business proposal and to make money, a legitimate goal for any business person. His second goal was to invest in the country of his birth and give something back. All those years ago, little did he realise what lay ahead.

Tom Gilmartin was born in Dunfore in Ballinfull, north Sligo, and emigrated to the UK in his late teens. His story is the story of many intelligent and hard-working people who had to emigrate from this country. He left Sligo in 1957, against his father's wishes, in order to make a better life in England. He was far more successful than most of his contemporaries in this regard. He built up a successful engineering company in Luton which manufactured sophisticated mechanical handling engineering systems for the nearby Vauxhall car factory and other manufacturers. When the industry collapsed in the early 1980s, he moved into property development identifying sites and investors for projects in Milton Keynes, Belfast and other towns. In partnership and with encouragement from property group Arlington Securities, which was prepared to invest €20 million, he began to assemble properties along Bachelor's Walk in Dublin city centre and in Quarryvale in west Dublin. However, he soon began to meet unexpected obstacles which have been well described in his testimony to the tribunal. Following the collapse of the economy, the goal of this Government is to seek and encourage investment in Ireland, in other words, Ireland is seeking the Tom Gilmartins of today to put money into our economy and assist in our recovery. This was the sincere ambition of Tom Gilmartin but, unfortunately for him, this turned out to be a personal nightmare.

It is worth reminding the House of the conclusions of the Mahon tribunal report with regard to Tom Gilmartin which are stated in section 7, page 2458. The decision on the part of Mr. Gilmartin to make a payment to the Fianna Fáil Party was misconceived and entirely inappropriate on his part. However, the tribunal accepted that he did this in circumstances which included duress or coercion, where he believed he had no choice but to act accordingly in order to avoid obstacles and improper behaviour on the part of elected public representatives and a senior public servant and in order to create a level playing field in relation to his plans to develop Quarryvale.

This is a significant statement and, in my view, it completely vindicates the bona fides of Tom Gilmartin's business proposals for Bachelor's Walk and Quarryvale. I am very angry as a Sligoman and as an Irishman at the way Tom Gilmartin was treated. It was like being hijacked or robbed on the M50 by Dick Turpin or Ned Kelly; wherever he turned there was a senior Fianna Fáil politician or a bag man with the paw out. It is frustrating to read Tom Gilmartin's evidence to the tribunal and to imagine his thoughts at the hands of these individuals who can be rightly accused of extortion. I listened to Thomas Gilmartin junior at the weekend and he provided us with a comprehensive account of his family's feelings. The efforts by various media commentators and politicians to discredit Tom Gilmartin as a witness were despicable in my view. The attempt by counsel for former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, to suggest that Tom Gilmartin had mental health issues must have been the lowest point in this saga. Under cross-examination by counsel, Tom Gilmartin was asked if he had ever discussed any of these issues or allegations with a medical adviser. Thomas Gilmartin junior described this as a low-life action.

The evidence and statement of Tom Gilmartin identified Frank Dunlop as the bag man for some of the accused politicians. Were it not for this and the ultimate admission by Dunlop, Judge Mahon would never have been able to present such a comprehensive and revealing report to the House. For this reason alone, Tom Gilmartin has given great service to this country because it means that people who betrayed the electorate by taking bribes were exposed. Were it not for Tom Gilmartin's evidence we would not have learned about the large sums of money going through Bertie Ahern's bank account. We still await a credible explanation as to the origin of this money. The payment of €50,000 to the former Minister, Padraig Flynn, was not a corrupt payment according to the tribunal. However, it stated that Mr. Flynn received a corrupt payment. The arrogance of the actions of Flynn is well documented. However, it was his dismissal of Tom Gilmartin on the famous "Late Late Show" which was extremely hurtful for the Gilmartin family and showed the plan by the main culprits in this saga to implant the view that Tom Gilmartin was somehow imagining everything. The Mahon tribunal clearly found otherwise.

The Deputy is looking after his constituent.

Deputy Dooley is not too bad at that himself.

Ocean FM is the local radio station serving the Sligo region and this morning it broadcast a call to make Tom Gilmartin a freeman of Sligo. This is an example of the feelings of ordinary people on how he was treated by the establishment at the time, including senior Fianna Fáil politicians, senior local authority officials and rival developers. I can testify that Tom Gilmartin's bravery, tenacity and resolve to seek the truth is admired by all right-thinking people but in particular by his county men and women.

I welcome the reforms that have been implemented over the past 12 years which, in my view, will ensure that the type of practices in operation in the early 1990s will never happen again. As a member of a local authority for more than 35 years, I can testify that changes brought in by successive governments since 2000 have strengthened the checks and balances to ensure transparency in the actions of local government officials and elected members. I look forward to proposals and legislation to deal with the recommendations of this tribunal which will further strengthen this transparency and ensure our people have trust and confidence in the planning system.

I will speak about my experience and how I became involved in politics. As a young man I helped the local rugby club by cutting the grass on my tractor and I helped the local GAA club by loaning them a chainsaw. My mother used to say that I was always more likely to give someone else a hand than to do the work at home. This is how I became involved in politics, by an involvement in the local community and in the GAA and rugby clubs. It is sad to note that as a result of my election to the local council and subsequently to the Dáil I am tainted by association as a result of the findings of the Mahon tribunal. People in the street ask me how many brown envelopes I have received. I am hurt by this insinuation. I am told on the doorsteps that we are all the same and this hurts me. I am one of a new breed of politicians who have been elected to this Dáil and we have no association with the corruption in which certain members of various parties partook. The Mahon tribunal report signalled the identity of individuals who have tainted new politicians - like me. We are different. We were elected because we are part and parcel of a community and our only interest is being involved in and helping that community. We have no interest in any financial gain to be got from anything other than our hard work. We want to talk and listen to people. The abuse of the system need not always be great. It need not always be €50,000 in a brown envelope or an alleged €10,000 gambling bet on a horse in Cartmel, or places like it. It can be small - such as ink cartridges. We must all take responsibility for actions taken in the Dáil.

In the corruption perception index of 2011 Ireland is not judged to be a corrupt country but is on a par with Belgium and the United Kingdom. There was a photograph in The Irish Times yesterday of our former Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, who was in a country ranked No. 143. I wonder what advice he was giving those people as to the direction they should take.

I am sharing time with Deputy Timmy Dooley. I welcome the opportunity to speak on the report published last week by the Mahon tribunal, which has been ongoing since 1997. It has unearthed some very disturbing facts about the heart of high office in this country. The report speaks for itself. Critically important when a report like this is published is that people accept the findings and deal with them in whatever way is appropriate, whether dealing with it as a political party or as the Oireachtas making the recommendations that may flow from any particular tribunal.

The Mahon tribunal is quite clear in its findings. It stated that corruption was endemic in the planning process in the Dublin area and was at the heart of decision making in respect of the zoning of lands. It has exposed that clearly and we must deal with it from that point of view in the Oireachtas, in how we go about introducing legislation based on the tribunal's recommendations so that we can ensure we have appropriate oversight throughout the country in the years ahead. Some of the recommendations of the Mahon tribunal have already been implemented in legislation with regard to governance and funding of political parties and oversight of same. We have a long way to go towards banning corporate donations but legislation should be introduced as quickly as possible to ensure that parties are obliged to accept donations in small amounts only rather than in the corporate donations that were at the heart of many of the difficulties unearthed by the tribunal.

From my party's point of view the report raised very serious issues and we will deal with them in a way appropriate for a political party. More broadly, although the tribunal was established by the Houses of the Oireachtas the debate in this House on its findings has been very partisan. The previous speaker summed this up: the debate has been partisan and is based on attacking a political party rather than looking at the findings, addressing the facts as established and dealing with the recommendations in a meaningful way that will bring back the confidence of the people in public life. This confidence has been completely debased and undermined. The integrity of public office has been undermined and the integrity of politicians of all political parties has also suffered, both as a result of the findings and because of the suspicions that were there prior to the actual findings.

As a Fianna Fáil Member of Dáil Éireann, what I find interesting is that there seems to be a certain standard to which my party must rise in order to ensure we meet our requirements while other parties seem to be able to adjudicate themselves on lower standards. They pat themselves on the back and point out that they are whiter than white, which clearly is not the case. If one looks at the historical context of many of the political parties in this House much of it is very murky, to say the least. I listened to lectures in this House from Deputy Jonathan O'Brien. The man who replaced the Deputy on Cork City Council was convicted by the Special Criminal Court in 1999 for the offence of carrying a loaded gun when he was stopped in Mitchelstown, with two other people. He refused to recognise the court and to this day we have found no explanation as to what he was doing on that fateful morning in Mitchelstown with a loaded gun, heading somewhere in the Republic of Ireland. I know a small bit about guns. One thing for sure is that one does not go duck-hunting with a handgun - one uses a shotgun. That man certainly was not going duck-hunting that morning.

Standards must be maintained by all political parties. Some parties within this House are refusing even to look into themselves and address their problems. Not only Sinn Féin but many other parties have an obligation to look into themselves and deal with the deficiencies in their standards. Let us be clear. The Moriarty tribunal has been ignored. It was whitewashed by this Government. Its findings were stark. They clearly stated that Deputy Lowry, then a Fine Gael Cabinet Minister, delivered a licence to Denis O'Brien. That issue has not been dealt with by anybody on the other side of the House and it is one that deserves scrutiny, not only from Members but also from the fourth estate. I urge that people look at that issue, too.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. There is no doubt that the publication of the final report of the Mahon tribunal marks a dark chapter in the history of my party. There is little doubt it will have a significant impact on the way in which politics is recognised or perceived by the Irish public and a wider audience.

There is a necessity, however, to put this report and the culture that existed 20 years ago in context, as they relate to the Fianna Fáil Party. The number of individuals found to be corrupt in the report, those found to be untruthful or to have considerable amounts of money in bank accounts associated with them, for which there is no credible explanation or the origins of which are open to question, form a very small percentage of the overall officeholders who have come from our stable. I only have to look to my constituency to see the calibre of these - people such as Brendan Daly, Tony Killeen, Síle de Valera and her grandfather, Sylvester Barrett, Paddy Hillery and Dr. Bill Loughnane. There were many others - those are just the people from my constituency who have held office, representing the party I now have the honour and privilege to represent. That is without referencing the thousands of volunteers associated with our party who have always gone about their business representing their community, focused on a vision of bettering the society of the people they represent and with whom they are associated.

I reject absolutely, therefore, the efforts of some to cast a dark shadow over the entirety of the Fianna Fáil organisation as a political movement and its capacity and potential to be a considerable force in and on the Irish political landscape in the years ahead. I reject that out of hand. It is a cheap shot by some. That is not in any way to diminish the work we must do to regain the trust of the people because of the sins of a very small group of people.

My colleague is right when he noted that the debate in this House has been largely partisan. Some have sought to characterise the entirety of the Fianna Fáil organisation, based on the actions of some, but they fail to recognise comments made by others. I recall what a former Taoiseach and leader of Fine Gael, John Bruton, said when he was questioned about the transgressions - as they were seen at the time - of some of his councillor base. I paraphrase somewhat. He said, "We are not all angels", as he sought to diminish or brush aside the concerns of people at the time. That is a parallel to what the former Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, was mentioned for in the course of the tribunal.

Deputy Kelleher is right when he references Sinn Féin. I have no issue with people elected to this House where the public has full and open knowledge of their history but the current leader of Sinn Féin continues to deny his membership of the IRA as if there was somehow a difference, continues to deny his associated links with the disappearance of individuals in the past and continues to be belligerent about what he believes to be the transgressions of Fianna Fáil. I will accept the findings of the report in its entirety. Deputy Adams and others in his party continue to deny the past and draw a veil over it, suggesting they are in a position to cast judgment.

I heard the Minister on television last night and I am glad he is in the Chamber. In principle, I do not question the reasons that planning investigations in five counties were brought within the Department. I am sure the Minister had a valid reason for doing so at the time and indicated that the former Minister of State, Deputy Penrose, thought it more expeditious. The difficulty is the perception in the minds of some that there are problems in those counties and perhaps other counties. Sadly, because of the publication of the report and all that has flown from it, the Minister is left with no choice but to reinstate the level of activity that existed prior to his coming to office with regard to those investigations.

Which was no activity.

I accept that but work was under way.

No work was done.

I ask the Minister to restart the work.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Top
Share