This item constantly recurs on our agenda. We are now in public session and it is appropriate that we give a brief outline to journalists, who might not have been following the case, of what occurred. This involves a taxpayer who was in dispute with the Revenue Commissioners about the amount of tax he owed. He referred his case, as he was entitled to do, to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman reviewed the case and the paperwork associated with it and received presentations from the Revenue Commissioners about it. The Ombudsman arrived at the independent view that this taxpayer should be paid €600,000, some in compensation and some to refund tax, that had been wrongfully collected.
A strange thing happened. The Revenue Commissioners said they would not pay it. They then took the option of horse-trading where the Ombudsman, in effect, said, "If you are not going to pay €600,000, what will you pay?" Eventually they arrived at a figure of €300,000. The taxpayer had no involvement. This was done over his head and without his agreement. He subsequently received a cheque for €300,000. Some people might be of the view that he did not do too badly in that he got a refund of €300,000. However, the independent review decided that the amount should be €600,000. Everybody respects the decisions made by the Ombudsman but in my 16 years in the Oireachtas, I have never seen a recommendation or an award from the Ombudsman being overturned or set aside in that way.
What would happen in the opposite situation? The Chairman is an accountant and has worked in this area for a long time. If the Revenue Commissioners raised an assessment against him for €300,000, would they set that aside and embark on horse-trading with him and accept what he offered? It does not work that way. Consider the case of a big company that has the wherewithal to take a legal action against the Revenue Commissioners. What would happen in that case? The company would get its pound of flesh plus its legal costs. This case involves a taxpayer who does not have the resources to take a legal case. He took the route that is followed by ordinary individuals who do not have the resources to take legal action, namely, the Ombudsman, but his award was not honoured. Is that not a terrible injustice? The Minister for Finance, like his predecessor, has run away from this matter.
This raises a question about the independence of the Ombudsman, the competence of the Ombudsman to reach decisions and make awards and confidence in the institution of the Ombudsman. This is not right. An injustice has been done to this taxpayer. I note Deputy Ó Caoláin's proposal that the committee write to the Minister again but what stronger action can we take? The wish of this committee is being ignored. Is it in our power to bring a motion before the Dáil to the effect that the committee recommends that the recommendation of the Ombudsman be followed through and delivered upon? We should take that type of stern action because the Minister and the Department of Finance are giving us the back of their hand. They do not care what the committee says.
We should pursue how we can make definite progress on this matter. It is not something we should allow to be set aside. It is unprecedented in all the years I have been a Member of the Oireachtas. Perhaps we should obtain advice on sending an agreed motion from the committee to the floor of the House.