The motion amends the terms of reference of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters which was established pursuant to a motion passed by both Houses last October. A resolution in like manner was passed by Dáil Éireann yesterday with the support of all parties in that House.
There are two main objectives to the amending terms. First, the motion provides for the amendment to the original terms of reference of the tribunal sought by Mr. Justice Flood, the sole member of the planning tribunal, in his interim report of 26 February 1998. Second, the remit of the tribunal is being extended to enable it to inquire into all substantial payments made or benefits provided, directly or indirectly for whatever purpose or with whatever motive, to Mr. Raphael Burke, the former Minister, Minister of State, Deputy and county councillor.
In accordance with the provisions of the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 1998, Mr. Justice Flood has consented to the second amendment proposed, following consultation with the Attorney General on behalf of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government under the terms of the Act. This comprehensive amendment of the planning tribunal's terms of reference shows the commitment of the Government, and that of both parties in Government, to ensure the highest standards of behaviour are upheld in public office. The Taoiseach and the Tánaiste are agreed that the best way forward in regard to the controversy surrounding Mr. Burke is to ensure a full judicial inquiry is held to fully investigate all relevant matters.
The original terms of reference of the Flood Tribunal provided for the fullest possible investigation of the propriety, from the viewpoint of the planning system, of the payment which Mr. Burke himself acknowledged as having received from Mr. Gogarty, and indeed any other payment to him that might have been connected in any way with the operation of the planning system. When it became known that Mr. Burke had received at least one other large contribution, notwithstanding his statement in the Dáil last September, the Government determined that this and any other substantial contributions or benefits received by Mr. Burke should also be investigated to establish if there was anything untoward relating to the purpose or motives of the donor in making such a payment, or of Mr. Burke in soliciting, receiving or rewarding it.
Having considered the various options available to the Government, it became clear fairly quickly that the best course was to extend the remit of the planning tribunal as it was already examining at least one payment made to Mr. Burke. Mr. Justice Flood was agreeable to taking on this wider investigation and he was satisfied that it would not create undue problems for the work of the tribunal.
I would like to take this opportunity to formally place on the record of the Seanad the Government's thanks to Mr. Justice Flood for agreeing to widen the remit of the tribunal in the manner proposed, particularly given the already heavy work load of the tribunal and the demanding task with which it has been charged.
It is very important that neither I, in introducing the motion, nor any Member in speaking on it, should be seen in any way as pre-empting the work of the tribunal in relation to the matters in question. Therefore, while I do not intend to comment directly on the allegations which have led to today's resolution, it has to be said there is general agreement among all parties that Mr. Burke's activities should be judicially investigated. One of the founding principles of my party, the Progressive Democrats, was to ensure that the integrity of the political system was upheld and to restore public confidence in the workings of our democracy. These values hold equally true today.
It is in all our interests that this tribunal should inquire thoroughly into the allegations which have been made concerning payments made to Mr. Burke. Of course, it is also important that Mr. Burke's rights to justice and a fair hearing are protected. The tribunal procedure will ensure that fair procedures are applied and the principles of natural justice upheld while ensuring the public interest is served in arriving at the truth of these matters.
Mr. Justice McCracken stated quite clearly in his report on his inquiries into the Dunnes payments that it is unacceptable for any Member of the Oireachtas to receive large personal gifts, and went on to refer to the potential for bribery and corruption. Speaking in the context of large sums of money, he also said that if politicians are to give effective service to all their constituents or to all citizens, they must not be under a financial obligation to some constituents or some citizens only. I can assure the House that both parties in the Government subscribe to these views.
It is entirely inappropriate for any politician to solicit or accept on a personal basis substantial payments or benefits. Acceptance of such payments is open to the interpretation, however ill founded this maybe in any particular case, that the donor expected or the recipient provided some benefit. This is especially true in the case of an office holder. This applies to local elected representatives, whose decisions on development plans can add considerably to the value of land, just as much as it does to Ministers or Deputies.
For these reasons, it is in the interests of all parties to ensure the tribunal clears up the circumstances of these payments. I am confident that Mr. Justice Flood and his team will leave no stone unturned in getting to the bottom of these matters. The tribunal will have the full support of the Government, and of both parties in Government, in this task.
I would like to remind the House that, as a result of consensus and co-operation among all parties, we have imposed legislative constraints which should go a long way in guarding against any repetition of the type of activities in question.
Under the Electoral Act, 1997, political parties and Members of each House of the Oireachtas and the European Parliament are, since 15 May 1997, required to furnish a donation statement each year indicating whether a donation exceeding the relevant threshold was received during the preceding year and giving particulars of any such donation. Following an election, candidates not elected at the election must furnish a similar statement in relation to donations received by them at the election. The disclosure threshold for a political party is £4,000 and for individual members and candidates it is £500.
The Ethics in Public Office Act is another recent legislative measure which is doing much to promote openness and accountability in public life. It is important to say that all these advances were supported by all parties in the Oireachtas. The new procedures on political donations introduce transparency into the system of funding of political parties and candidates for election. We must be vigilant in ensuring these procedures operate effectively, both in our own interests in defending our integrity as elected representatives and in the wider public interest of safeguarding the integrity of the democratic system.
Another very significant step in ensuring high standards in public life and underpinning public confidence is the Government's commitment, already announced by the Taoiseach, to establishing a permanent commission on standards in public office. This would have a wide ranging mandate to investigate allegations of misconduct in public office and by all elected representatives. Proposals in that regard are being considered by the Government.
I expect a commission on standards in public office will be welcomed in both Houses of the Oireachtas. While the tribunals currently under way and those which have completed their work are doing and have done commendable work, it is generally agreed that setting up ad hoc tribunals is not the most effective way of dealing with allegations, which nowadays are made with increasing regularity and which can have a corrosive effect if not dealt with promptly and decisively. Apart from anything else, it places great demands on the Judiciary at a time when the court system has more than enough ordinary business to cope with. The House will have an opportunity to debate this wider issue when the Government brings forward its proposals in due course.
The extended terms of reference before the House are extremely comprehensive in relation to any payments or benefits given to Mr. Burke and show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Government is determined to have all the allegations in this respect fully investigated and the truth laid bare for all to see. In the first place, the tribunal will have to establish whether any substantial payments were made or benefits provided, directly or indirectly, to Mr. Burke during his political career. If there were such payments, then it will have to decide on the motives of the benefactors — whether they were corrupt or intended to influence matters improperly.
Furthermore, it must decide if the payments were made in circumstances which may give rise to a reasonable inference that the motive for making or receiving the payments was inappropriately connected with any public office held by Mr. Burke, not only as a Minister or Minister of State, but also as a Deputy or county councillor. Then, in addition to the foregoing, the tribunal must decide whether, in return for any payments, Mr. Burke did anything directly or indirectly while holding any public office which was intended to benefit the donor or indeed anybody else who may be connected in any way.
These terms of reference are quite exhaustive and will enable the tribunal investigate all relevant aspects of the payments that have been mentioned or, indeed, any other payments. At the same time, the Government is concerned that the tribunal should have terms of reference which are well focused and which ensure that the tribunal's time is not wasted investigating irrelevant matters. The tribunal, therefore, will have to form a judgment on whether any particular payment or benefit warrants investigation. I am confident this discretion will enable the tribunal to carry out its work in an efficient and effective manner.
These are the core provisions of the addition to the terms of reference of the planning tribunal. Provision is also made for the way the tribunal is to carry out its work. These provisions are similar to those which apply to the tribunal's existing mandate. The tribunal will carry out its preliminary investigations in private in order to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to warrant proceeding to a full public inquiry. Should the tribunal find that there is insufficient evidence to warrant proceeding to a full public inquiry, it must report this to the Clerk of the Dáil.
There is a requirement that the tribunal provides an interim report to the Clerk of the Dáil on the new matters referred to it, indicating in relation to them the number of parties represented, progress to date, the likely duration of the proceedings and any other matters it believes should be brought to the attention of the Clerk of the Dáil. The latter may include views on the terms of reference.
In this respect I can assure the House that if the tribunal in the course of its deliberations becomes aware of any deficiencies or unintended constraints in the terms of reference, the Government will do whatever is necessary to ensure the inquiry fully achieves its objectives. The Clerk of the Dáil is obliged on receipt of any report from the tribunal to have it laid immediately before both Houses.
The other amendment in today's motion grants in full Mr Justice Flood's request to enable him to consider matters included in the original terms of reference which had arisen prior to 20 June 1985. This date is the date of the local elections held before the making of the payment to Mr. Burke by Mr. Gogarty. It was inserted in the original terms of reference and accepted by all sides of the House as a reasonable time frame within which the tribunal should operate. It was certainly not intended to limit the effective discharge of the tribunal's work.
In his interim report of 26 February, 1998, Judge Flood stated that he was advised that evidence in relation to matters which occurred prior to 20 June 1985 is admissible if and in so far as it is relevant to matters which occurred subsequent to 20 June 1985. However, he stated that the fact that such a date is specified may give rise to a legal challenge which would inevitably delay the proceedings of the tribunal in relation to such matters. Notwithstanding the advice and to avoid any such legal challenge, the tribunal sought the deletion of the words ". committed on or after the 20th June 1985 .". The Government is happy to accede to this request.
The planning system is one of the principal means of ensuring that development takes place in an environmentally sustainable manner and is essential to our economic and social development as a society. The Government has therefore taken, and will in the future take, further steps to ensure that the integrity of the planning system is upheld. At the moment great demands are placed on the planning system to support our economic development in processing planning permission applications and in adopting development plans and zoning land for specific uses. We must be sure that all these decisions are taken on the basis of proper planning and development considerations. Planning decisions can affect the value of land and benefit land owners enormously. On the other hand, ill considered zoning can lead to increased costs to the taxpayer for infrastructural services and to poor quality living environments where people are cut off from everyday services.
The Government is concerned to increase the effectiveness of the planning system and to ensure that planning decisions are made in good time, and in this context there is a resolution before both Houses of the Oireachtas to enable the Minister to increase the number of board members of An Bord Pleanála by three so that the board can deal more effectively with the continuing strong upward trend in the volume of planning appeals. Last week I was in the Seanad for the passing of the Urban Renewal Bill, 1998, to provide for the renewal of run down urban areas by means of integrated area plans.
However, all of this work will be fatally undermined if the public does not have confidence that the planning system operates in a fair and open manner for the overall public good. I believe that the great majority of elected representatives and officials operate the planning system honestly and diligently and deserve to have confidence in the system vindicated. It is to be hoped that the thorough inquiry being carried out by Mr. Justice Flood will achieve this result.
While the amendment requested by the tribunal could have been made after the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) Act, 1998, was enacted in May, prudence dictated that it should not be proceeded with until the means of investigating the matter of other payments to Mr. Burke which had by then come into the public domain was decided on. In the event, it was clearly better to avoid making two separate resolutions amending the terms of reference. I commend the resolution and the amended terms of reference to the House.