Vol. 525 No. 1
4 Mr. McDowell asked the Minister for Finance his views on the steering group report of the Committee of Public Accounts dealing with the Revenue Commissioners; if it is intended to implement the recommendations of the report, particularly the suggestion that legislation should be introduced to establish a new governing board with three non-executive directors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23807/00]
As the Deputy is aware, I established a steering group to carry out a review of the Office of the Revenue Commissioners consequent on the Committee of Public Accounts Sub-Committee on Certain Revenue Matters Parliamentary Inquiry into the DIRT First Report. The report of the review, which was noted by Government, was submitted to the Public Accounts Committee sub-committee on 1 September and was published by it on 5 September. The sub-committee also sought submissions on the report through public advertisements in the national newspapers which were placed by my Department at its request. The sub-committee will examine the report on 30 November 2000.
I am currently considering the report and will consider any recommendations made by the sub-committee before I submit proposals to Government.
Will the Minister agree there is a job to be done in re-establishing faith in the operations of the Revenue Commissioners following what was discovered during the course of the public accounts committee deliberations into DIRT? Given the work already carried out by the steering committee and the investigations that have been going on within his Department, is the Minister satisfied there is not the possibility of a second DIRT scandal? Is he satisfied that Revenue has implemented and enforced Revenue law to the degree we all expect and require and that there is not another scandal lurking in the closet?
Has the Deputy information in this regard? I certainly have no information that another DIRT scandal lurks around the corner. I would not like the impression to be given that this is the case. Has the Deputy any information to which I am not privy?
The Minister is missing my point which is that there is a job to be done in re-establishing faith in the operations of the Revenue Commissioners. We all need to be satisfied, therefore, that there is not another potential scandal about which we know nothing at this stage. I do not have specific information.
Will the Minister reply to some of the proposals made by the steering group? For example, recent newspaper reports suggested that he intends to abolish the Revenue Commissioners as such and bring in outside people. Perhaps he will give his initial reaction to that suggestion. Does he believe there should be increased use of information technology, for example, to randomly select people for audit? Does he believe the Revenue should publish more data on the number of audits carried out and the amount of tax collected under particular headings and so on?
It is important to put on the record my appreciation of the changes the Revenue Commissioners have made in the past ten or 15 years. I refer to this aspect during Committee Stage of the Finance Bill each year. As one who has practised in that area, I find the changes which have taken place in the past ten to 15 years in relation to Revenue practice and efficiency is mind-boggling. It should not be forgotten that significant changes have taken place. I have said previously outside this House that when the history of the Celtic tiger is written, there will certainly be a chapter on the changing efficiencies within the Revenue Commissioners, which have contributed greatly to the large Exchequer surpluses in recent years.
I compliment the steering group set up as a result of the public accounts committee inquiry. This involved some people from outside the country and the report was published within a remarkably short period. I compliment also the members of the Committee of Public Accounts for the wonderful work they did. As a result of the publication of the report, advertisements have been placed in the newspapers requesting people to make further submissions. The sub-committee group will go before the Committee of Public Accounts early next month. The public accounts committee will then make recommendations and I do not have a closed mind as to what should or should not be done about the various structures within the Revenue Commissioners. It will be important to hear the views of the Committee of Public Accounts. It will be important also to hear the submissions as a result of the publication of the report. When this process is concluded, I will consider the matter and bring recommendations to Government. The Government will then consider the matter further and all these issues will be taken into account. The public accounts committee has done a particularly good job. The steering group which compiled the report has done an excellent job in opening up some very interesting questions and putting forward many recommendations, all of which I will consider.
Can I take it the Minister expects to be in a position to bring his recommendations to Government sometime after 30 November and before the end of the year?
Recommendations will be made by the sub-committee of which Deputy Rabbitte is a member. These recommendations will also have to be taken into account. I will then bring a memorandum to Government which I anticipate will not be until early in the new year. Everyone has been impressed at the speed with which these issues have been considered in recent months, therefore it is not my intention to delay the matter, because this uncertainty would not be good for the morale of the staff of the Revenue Commissioners. We should make speedy decisions and put them into effect, which is what I intend.
