Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 Mar 2014

Vol. 834 No. 3

Leaders' Questions

Inné foilsíodh tuairisc Cigireacht an Gharda Síochána faoin gconspóid pointí pionóis Tá sé soiléir ón dtuarascáil sin go raibh fadhbanna móra ann sa chóras pointí pionóis.

Yesterday the report from the independent Garda Inspectorate clarified a number of matters concerning the penalty points issue. It is clear from the report that there is no evidence of corruption, which we all welcome, but there is evidence of severe sloppiness, to say the least. The one point that is clear is that without the persistence of whistleblowers, this issue would not have been exposed and the work that is under way today would not be happening. The overhaul of the current system is happening as a direct result of their input and work. This is why the refusal of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, to acknowledge their role is beyond belief. Chief Inspector Olson acknowledged the role of Sergeant Maurice McCabe, in particular. He stated he found the interview with Garda McCabe informative and that he found him credible. Senior gardaí who were interviewed have said the same. Despite this, the Minister for Justice and Equality is still stubbornly and defiantly refusing point blank to apologise to Sergeant McCabe for the comments he made in this House about his co-operation.

He does not do sorry.

The Minister abused the privileges of this House to seek to sully and destroy the reputation of a serving garda, but I suppose we should not be surprised because he also abused the privileges of his Ministry to try to damage the reputation of a Member of this House.

The Taoiseach stated yesterday, "In so far as apologies are concerned, I have already said that the Minister for Justice and Equality had one interpretation while Sergeant McCabe had a different interpretation." This is an unbelievably weak defence. To say the least, it is lily-livered that the Minister clearly abused the privilege of this House to try to destroy the reputation of Sergeant McCabe, a reputation that has come through in yesterday's report.

Does the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, believe the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, should apologise to Sergeant McCabe? Is it credible that a Government would allow a Minister to abuse the privileges of his office to sully the good name of a citizen of the State?

Níl Gaeilge sách maith agam chun ceisteanna a fhreagairt as Gaeilge. Mar sin, tá orm caint as Béarla. I would not like to mislead the House by answering the questions inaccurately in any way.

I share Deputy Calleary's welcoming of the report. As he indicated, it reveals very severe weaknesses in the process that existed. This has been the subject of reports over many years. The Government's intention has always been to restore confidence in the system. Immediately on receipt of the report, the Minister for Justice and Equality presented it to the Government. We have decided to implement its 37 recommendations. This afternoon, the joint implementation group will sit for the first time.

It is not the case that the Minister for Justice and Equality refused to acknowledge the role played by whistleblowers. He openly acknowledged, as I do, that the whistleblowers and their persistence have been crucial in getting to this point. We are now in a position to fix a system that has been clearly not working for many years. I acknowledge the role of whistleblowers, as has the Minister for Justice and Equality. Moreover, the Government is determined to ensure whistleblowers receive better protection. We are introducing legislation to do that. Specifically, we are introducing an amendment to ensure Garda whistleblowers will no longer have to go through the confidential recipient.

I do not want to politicise this. There is a danger, in circumstances in which the Dáil is rightly taking more interest in holding public officials to account, of seeking to politicise every objective for short-term political purposes. We need a Legislature that is able to conduct business in the way it should be done, that is, objectively. Members will have seen that the Minister for Justice and Equality did absolutely the right thing in every case as soon as he heard the allegations.

He absolutely did not.

He has delivered a report to the Dáil and acted on it, and we are fixing a system that clearly has been malfunctioning over a long period.

Will he say "Sorry"?

We agree absolutely agree that there should be a Legislature that can conduct business in a way that is seen to be objective. We do not want one in which a Minister can use his privileges to abuse the reputation of a servant of the State. That is what has happened here and what we want an apology for. We are not politicising this. The Minister for Justice and Equality clearly abused the privileges of his office to try to sully the reputation of the man whose intervention has led to all the work the Minister Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation has just laid out. Why does he not say "Sorry"? Is it not in his dictionary? He has committed a serious wrong, and it has been proven by the Garda Inspectorate that the evidence of Garda McCabe is credible.

The Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, sees himself as a champion of trying to change the culture in the health service and encouraging staff to say sorry. Why is the Taoiseach not forcing a Minister who abuses his office in this House and on the national airwaves to apologise? The army of spin doctors around the Taoiseach is portraying him as a mighty mouse this week because of Mr. Frank Flannery's stepping aside, but it seems he is a church mouse in the case of the Minister for Justice and Equality. Surely the latter owes an apology to Sergeant McCabe for trying to destroy his reputation using the privilege of this House.

It is simply not true that the Minister for Justice and Equality committed any serious wrong; that is not the case. He acted absolutely correctly in respect of the handling of complaints that came this way. Deputy Calleary's party had an opportunity last week to debate this. We spent all day debating precisely this issue. The Minister for Justice and Equality set out his position and allowed questions and answers. He has been fully accountable. What he has been seeking to achieve, and what we are now on our way to achieving, is a restoration of confidence in this system. The Minister has acknowledged very openly that we would not be at this point were it not for whistleblowers.

He tried to destroy them

He has acknowledged that value.

He tried to take them out.

The only issue on which the Deputy's party in my belief for largely political reasons seeks to focus is the question as to whether-----

He tried to destroy them in this House.

No, that is not the case. The only issue, on which the Deputy's party seeks to focus, was a discussion as to whether there was co-operation between the O'Mahoney investigation and the whistleblowers. We know as a matter of fact that there was no such co-operation; there was not any interaction between the two bodies.

That is considerably disputed.

As the Taoiseach said yesterday, different opinions can be formed as to what went wrong in that case. Clearly it did not happen on either side the way one would want such an investigation to be conducted. As far as the Minister for Justice and Equality is concerned-----

So the Minister, Deputy Bruton, is also afraid of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Shatter.

Fianna Fáil needs to look to its own record given that much of this happened under its watch. There were reports going back over many years which called for the codification of the process of cancellation of points-----

(Interruptions).

----- and Fianna Fáil did not act on those recommendations. Fianna Fáil Members need to acknowledge that we are proceeding immediately to fix this system that has been broken for well-nigh ten years. They cannot pretend they are not party to that failure.

What about the report of Mr. Connolly saying, "Shatter will destroy you"?

At every turn he has failed to do the right thing.

An aontaíonn an tAire nach mbeadh an tAire Dlí agus Cirt agus Comhionannais, nó fiú Coimisinéir an Gharda Síochána, sa tsáinn ina bhfuil siad inniu más rud é gur rinne siad gníomhartha tar éis tuairisc an Ard-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste a fhoilsiú i mí Mheán Fómhair seo caite? Tá a fhios againn go raibh duine as cúigear ag éalú as pointí pionóis agus nach raibh toghairm seirbheáilte ar dhaoine. I roinnt ceantair, bhí ráta cealaithe breis is 50% ann i gcomparáid le ceantair eile. An aontaíonn an tAire nach raibh aon mhilleán ar Sergeant Maurice McCabe agus an t-iar Gharda John Wilson i gcomhthéacs na tuairisce sin ó Mheán Fómhair 2012, go raibh an ceart acu an cheist seo a ardú ón tús, agus ba chóir go mbeadh leithscéal gafa ag an Aire ag an am agus ag an gCoimisinéir don bheirt? Níor tharla sin, agus cuireadh leis an ionsaí ar charachtair na beirte ó shin – an tAire agus an Coimisinéir a rinne an t-ionsaí.

Tá cuntas cáinteach eile os ár gcomhair ó Chigireacht an Gharda Síochána. Ní bheadh na sonraí sa tuairisc sin againn gan an bheirt agus an seasamh cróga a ghlac siad.

An bhfuil sé chomh deacair sin don Aire, an Teachta Shatter, seasamh suas agus a rá go bhfuil brón air agus glacadh leis go raibh sé mícheart nuair a rinne sé ionsaí ar an mbeirt seo, agus go raibh an ceart ag an mbeirt? Más rud é nach bhfuil sé fearúil go leor é sin a rá, an bhfuil sé in am don Aire éirí as a phost?

Ar iarr an tAire, an Teachta Bruton, ar an Aire, an Teachta Shatter, leithscéal a ghabháil don bheirt sin, a bhí cróga, don Oireachtas agus do gach duine eile atá thíos le seo le breis is bliain ón uair a chuireadh an chéad mhórthuairisc os ár gcomhair a léirigh an chaimiléireacht agus an droch-chleachtadh maidir leis na pointí pionóis?

As I have already acknowledged, the whistleblowers have had a vital role in getting us to this point. As the Deputy said, the report exposes many very serious failings. With so-called "send-backs", 65% were not returned. As the Deputy has acknowledged, there was huge variation in the treatment in different districts with some refusing every application for cancellation and others accepting every application for cancellation. Some 52% of summonses went unserved. In the case of 60% of the convictions, no driving licence number was recorded after the cases and 30% of fines went unpaid. Clearly this has exposed very serious failings in this system.

The role of the inspectorate is not to look at whether any of these decisions were made corruptly, but to expose a system that was riddled with shortcomings and that is what it has done. It has made 37 recommendations and the Government yesterday made a decision to implement all of them. As of today we are starting on the process of the implementation.

As I said to Deputy Calleary, I do not accept that the Minister for Justice and Equality has failed in any respect. Clearly when allegations were brought to his attention, as they have been, he has acted properly in all cases. We have seen, as a consequence of his action, this inspection report. The Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission is investigating whether any activity that occurred under the fixed-notice cancellation has issues in respect of the responsibility of individual gardaí, and that is being dealt with. As I said to Deputy Calleary, the Minister for Justice and Equality has acted properly in this respect.

Has he acted honourably?

There is an attempt to seek to politicise this by going back repeatedly to this issue, which the Minister dealt with at great length, as to whether there was co-operation between the O'Mahoney investigation and the whistleblowers. We know as a point of fact that there was not engagement between them. That is very clear and it has been acknowledged that different people have different interpretations as to why that happened.

Ní thuigim cén fáth nach féidir leis an Aire glacadh leis gur chóir don Aire Dlí agus Cirt agus Comhionannais, nó fiú Coimisinéir an Gharda Síochána leithscéal a ghabháil don bheirt sin a bhí cróga. Ní leor glacadh leis go raibh an ceart acu an cheist a ardú. Cad é tuairim an Aire faoin ráiteas a rinne Coimisinéir an Gharda Síochána aréir? An leor é? Níl mórán daoine fágtha, seachas an tAire Shatter agus an Coimisinéir, a chreideann go raibh gníomhartha an Sergeant Maurice McCabe agus an t-iar Gharda John Wilson gránna. An ndéanfaidh an tAire Bruton iallach a chur ar an gCoiminiséir, Martin Callinan, leithscéal a ghabháil don bheirt, don Dáil agus don phobal i gcoitinne, ní hamháin as an masla a thug siad don bheirt ach as an gceannasaíocht ar an gcóras pointí pionóis ó bunaíodh é, agus an chaimiléireacht agus an droch-chleachtas atá léirithe sa tuairisc is déanaí? Muna bhfuil an Coimisinéir sásta leithscéal a ghabháil agus a phort a athrú, an bhfuil an tAire sásta impí air éirí as a phost?

I understand the Commissioner yesterday clarified the context in which he used the word "disgusting" in respect of the incidents that occurred. I will not repeat his clarification. He made that clarification over the context in which he made that remark.

On the question as to whether the Commissioner has failed, it is very clear the Commissioner introduced new measures and procedures as a result of the earlier assessments of this process. The latest report, the report if the inspectorate, has clearly stated that the procedures need further improvement and has set out a different approach, including, for example, a central audit arrangement so that there would not be multiple sources of potential audit occurring and having a single centre authorising the decisions to reduce penalty points.

Clearly the new recommendations go far beyond what was introduced in the past, but that was what this inspectorate was asked to do. It was asked by the Minister for Justice and Equality to look at the various reports that had been assembled, the O'Mahoney report, the PSU report and the past reports by the Comptroller and Auditor General and make recommendations for a robust system in which the public can have confidence in the future.

That is what they have done. I freely acknowledge they go well beyond what the gardaí had done before, but that is why we asked them to do it and it cannot be seen as a reflection that we now have an agenda that will fix this which is being implemented. We cannot use it as a reflection on the past but, of course, we have to learn from the shortcomings. However, the actions the Commissioner took, which were in good faith, were not sufficient and now we are going a good deal further.

His actions were in good faith?

Tá a fhios againn go léir go bhfuil 121,000 morgáiste in iarmharach. Tá 60,000 dóibh sin in iarmharach ar feadh bliain agus tá 33,500 in iarmharach ar feadh níos mó ná dhá bhliain. Tá 30,000 clann ar a laghad i mbaol a bheith curtha amach ach as a dtithe cónaithe. Tá imní orm gur tugadh 1,500 cás nua chun tithe teaghlaigh a athsheilbhiú san cheathrú dheireanach de 2013 de réir ráiteas ó FLAC, an t-ionad chúnamh dlíthiúil. Dar le The Irish Times, 14 Eanáir 2014, “banks are sitting on 1,500 repossessed properties.”

An samhradh seo caite, bhí sé ráite ag na saineolaithe go dtagann borradh ar athshlánú gach uile lá. Roimh an Nollaig, d’iarr mé ar an Aire, an Teachta Quinn, an nglacann sé leis go bhfuil fadhb dháiríre ag baint leis na mílte teaghlach atá ag maireachtáil ar ioncam an-íseal, faoi leibhéal na costais maireachtála agus nach féidir leo leas a bhaint as an bpróiseas insolvency, agus atá i mbaol an teach teaghlaigh a chailliúint. Tá dhá rud déanta ag an Rialtas ba chúis leis an ardú seo. I mí Iúil chuaigh an leasú ar reachtaíocht i bhfeidhm chun é a dhéanamh níos éasca do na bainc teach a athsheilbhiú. Roimhe sin, i mí an Mheithimh, thug an Rialtas cead don Bhanc Ceannais na treoirlínte a athrú chun teach a athsheilbhiú tar éis dhá mhí seachas dhá mhí dhéag.

An dtabharfaidh an Rialtas isteach reachtaíocht a chiallaíonn go gcaithfidh na bainc bunairgead na morgáistí a laghdú go dtí luach reatha an tí do gach éinne? Will the Government bring in legislation to ensure that mortgages will be reduced to the current market value of homes? An gcuirfidh an Rialtas cíos in ionad morgáiste ar fáil mar cheart dlíthiúil? Will the Government make available the mortgage to rent scheme as a matter of law do gach a bhfuil ag maireachtáil faoi bhun na costais maireachtála agus nach bhfuil in ann leas a bhaint as an insolvency process?

I thank Deputy Healy for raising this issue. Certainly, this is one of the biggest challenges we face in terms of getting over the legacy of the banking crisis, and there are many families trying to cope with this. What is encouraging is that, for the first time, there is a sign that the numbers in mortgage difficulty are beginning to decline. As the Deputy knows, under the guidance of the Central Bank, very strict targets have been provided for the banks and mortgage companies. There is solid progress and engagement between consumers and lenders has already led to 51,000 permanent mortgage restructures, an increase of 6,000 accounts in the last quarter of 2013. There has also been a significant rise in the number of split mortgages from 2,500 when this data series began to 6,200. In addition, the number of mortgage accounts in arrears for greater than 90 days has fallen from 81,000 in the third quarter to 79,000 at the end of December. Therefore, some progress is being made although, clearly, it continues to be a very challenging and difficult area.

The Deputy asked whether it is possible for the Government to introduce new legislation that would allow the write-down of all mortgages to their current value. Very clearly, that would not be possible.

Of course it is possible.

In order to write down the value of mortgages on that scale, as these are losses that are not provided for, someone would have to provide capital for the banks to do that. This could run to many billions and, indeed, probably €40 billion or €50 billion would have to be provided in additional capital to do that. The taxpayer has already put €64 billion into the banks and is not in a position to provide additional capital to achieve the sort of write-down the Deputy desires.

Clearly, each case has to be dealt with in a sensitive way and the Government has provided a framework within which that can be dealt with. It has also provided the personal insolvency arrangement whereby people can have a work-out over six years to deal with the problem and come away after the six years with an affordable mortgage while remaining in their home.

On the issue of mortgage to rent, the Government has introduced the option of mortgage to rent in certain social housing cases. There is some take-up on that and I know applications are continuing under that scheme

Tá 30,000 clann ar a laghad i mbaol a bheith díbeartha as a teach cónaithe. Tá sé soiléir go bhfuil feall mór á imirt ag an Rialtas ar mhuintir na tíre agus go bhfuil an Rialtas chun dul ar aghaidh leis sin gan stad gan staonadh. Thug an tAire Shatter tuarascáil an ghrúpa saineolaithe os comhair an Cabinet ag moladh gur chóir an próiseas athsheilbhithe a dhéanamh níos éifeachtaí, in other words to make it easier to repossess family homes, trí chead a thabhairt chun execution orders a eisiúint ag an am céanna le hordaithe athsheilbithe. Tá sé seo an-tábhachtach, mar laghdaíonn sé an próiseas do sé mhí eile. This reduces the repossession process by over six months and helps the banks. An ghlacfaidh an Rialtas leis an moladh sin? An bhfuil an moladh sin i bhfeidhm?

Of course, I acknowledge there have been changes to deal with a number of areas of the legislation in regard to people in difficulties. There has been a suite of legislation, as I said, which includes the introduction of new personal insolvency arrangements to allow for work on this. There was a court case on which the Government acted as a result of the earlier court decisions in regard to some repossessions, and that clearly had to be acted upon.

What we are aiming to achieve in this area is to give people the maximum opportunity to stay in their homes while working out arrangements with the banking system. The Central Bank, as the Deputy knows, is overseeing that process. There is significant progress on that and, indeed, we read in the newspapers this week evidence of the way in which banks are dealing in a more creative way with people in genuine difficulty.

Clearly, every case has to be dealt with on its individual merits. There is not the opportunity, as the Deputy would like, for someone to say that every case must be dealt with exactly in this way, that is, by writing down the value to the market value. Such options are not available to us because the cost of such on the taxpayer would be so enormous.

Has the Government agreed to the Minister, Deputy Shatter's proposal?

We have to work within the system we have put in place. As I said, it is delivering an increased number of work-outs, restructurings and split mortgages.

In the case we have seen, there has been write-downs and warehousing of certain mortgages. There are mortgage-to-rent schemes and an increasing number of options are being developed. That is the way we need to work through these difficulties and try to keep as many people as possible in their homes on an affordable mortgage.

Top
Share