Relatives of the 48 young people who lost their lives in the unimaginable horror of the Stardust fire will be picketing outside the gates of Leinster House later today. What response can the Government make to their plea? They made a comprehensive submission to the Government during the summer. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform eventually met relatives. We do not know the Government's response even though the matter has been raised here consistently by my colleague, Deputy Broughan. The last thing we want to do on this side is to raise hopes that cannot be met. Nonetheless, the submission suggests there is good reason to believe that further investigation is warranted. It comes down to a net point — was the fire arson or accident? Their submission believes, and there are expert witnesses to suggest the same thing, that the tribunal misdirected itself as to a crucial fact relating to the layout and design of the premises and that it worked from a map that did not show the correct layout of the storerooms and the combustible material. The Keane tribunal found that the forensic investigation of the site was inadequate.

The Deputy's time has concluded.

The owners of the premises were left for a number of days in control of the premises before the forensic investigation took place. I put it to the Taoiseach that we have a tried mechanism that may well be appropriate in this situation, the facility to send in a senior counsel with the assistance of an expert assessor to review the tribunal papers, to review the Garda reports, to study the submission from the relatives, to take whatever evidence he would consider appropriate and to establish whether there is a basis for a fuller public investigation. This was an unimaginable horror inflicted on a working class community. They believe, as I do, that if they had some of the great and the good in their midst and if they were assisted by some of the professional classes they would not have been ignored for 25 years in the manner in which they have been ignored. It is coming to the stage where the Government must make up its mind. I do not understand the procrastination. A very long time has transpired since disturbing evidence was proffered that the tribunal may have misdirected itself.

We are all very familiar with the Stardust events and I certainly am because at the time I lived beside the Stardust site in the Pinebrook estate in Artane. As I was the administrator on call in the Mater Hospital that night, I remember it very well. It was for that reason that I decided after 25 years it was time for somebody to do it. Deputy Rabbitte is right in stating that no Government for the past 25 years has taken too much interest in it since the public inquiry — I did. I would like to consider that I got some credit for taking that interest. I will gladly acknowledge that Deputy Broughan has raised the matter with me in the House a number of times over the years.

For that reason I agreed to meet the relatives in the early part of the summer. However, Greg O'Neill, their legal representative, with whom I have dealt on many cases, did not have the evidence available. Deputy Rabbitte can drop the "eventual". When they had the information I met them with the Tánaiste and we had a long meeting. That meeting was about two issues. I am very familiar with all the details in the submission. I met the committee on 18 September when I got the submission and had a chance to look at it. There has been very active and positive consideration to address the issues of concern to the committee and to provide assistance to the families since then.

The first issue they raised with me on that day and in their data was to initiate and oversee a process intended to lead to the identification of the five unidentified victims. The Garda authorities followed a very exhaustive process, because on that day the chief forensic scientist and other senior staff were present. We then pursued it with the Garda. The Garda authorities have agreed to give their full support in the logistics of this process. That will be assisted by the forensic science laboratory with specialist analytical input from the UK. We could not have done that in the past — so it is not a criticism — because it is only in modern times that the DNA would have helped in this. The costs of the process will be borne by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. These include the analytical expenses as well as the exhumation and reburial expenses and reasonable costs. That was the first issue.

The second issue was as follows. They had an independent evaluation of the evaluation that was done for the independent inquiry — not new information. It is an independent evaluation of the original evaluation. I know the families are very anxious to receive a response to this. They particularly looked for a new public inquiry. They believe that the inquiry of the former Chief Justice, Ronan Keane, was flawed. They asked that these issues be looked at. There are the issues raised by Deputy Rabbitte and a number of other issues as well. However, it centres on the arson-accident issue and the technical issues.

I will give Deputy Rabbitte the answer he knows. It is not within my competence or that of my Department to make the technical, engineering and forensic analysis of this. It is a complex evaluation. After that meeting I asked senior officials, including senior technical officials, to examine these matters fully with an absolutely open mind. I will do anything I can to help these families. I know many of them personally and have met many of them over the years. I have met many delegations on their behalf. They have protested at my office and are protesting outside Leinster House. They believe that such actions highlight the issue. My advice is that it will not help one bit. I will help them to the best of my ability and in every way I can, but I must go on the total assessment made by the people who are independently capable of doing this. I have asked them to do this as fully and comprehensively as possible. When they give me that information, I will give that report. I cannot make a judgment about all the issues and I do not want to make any glib answers. I know what the issues are. I am not in a position to do that. However, there are people who can make that assessment.

We are talking about a very long public inquiry held under the chairmanship of the former Chief Justice, Ronan Keane, with all the advice that was there. They have now come back with their independent analysis of that and I have asked for people to make a judgment on it. I will report that. I will do that as soon as I have it. With the greatest of respect and to be helpful to the people, because I know them all, there is no need for them to be protesting and to be out in inclement weather. As soon as I have that report, I will do that, as I did with the exhumations, which was not a very good area for them to deal with — it was very horrific stuff. The House has my word that I will do that. However, I cannot pre-empt it and I cannot ignore it. I must base it on the evidence I get.

I did not raise this matter in any partisan way.

I accept that.

I am merely concerned that some peace of mind should be brought to the relatives concerned about the terrible tragedy that befell them. The Taoiseach says: "Deputy Rabbitte is right in stating that no Government for the past 25 years has taken too much of an interest in it since the public inquiry — I did", but I am bound to remind him that he has been in government since 1987 with the exception of two years. He has been Taoiseach for ten years. If he cannot offer them some way forward or some hope, who can? As far as I am concerned, this was an act of corporate manslaughter. If ever there is a definition of corporate manslaughter, this is it, with people crowded in unconscionable numbers into an unsafe space with the doors padlocked and combustible materials in the attic. How long does it take us to get this independent evidence that will enable the Taoiseach to make a decision about what mechanism can be put in place to satisfy the reasonable requests of the people concerned?

The Deputy's time has concluded.

The finding of arson enabled the owners of these premises to get millions in damages from the State and the taxpayer. The most serious questions were raised into which I do not want to go here. Given the precedent of Mr. Paddy McEntee, SC, being appointed in respect of the Barron report and other precedents since the commission of inquiries legislation was introduced, there is a way to appoint a senior senior counsel with an expert assessor. Let them do the work that the Taoiseach claims he cannot do. However, let Government make a decision on the matter and take those people out of their agony. They do not feel they have any clout in Irish society. They do not feel anybody is listening to them.

The Deputy's time has concluded.

They understand that the Taoiseach, along with everybody else in the House, has sympathy for the terrible grief they endured. However, they do not believe that anybody is likely to act to give them some confidence that at least the State has sought to get answers to questions that remain unanswered.

I will not be partisan about it either. I do not believe that Deputy Rabbitte can fairly make a political point that if I got information in September and dealt with it immediately, that was delaying it. They did not present this information. They did present other information over the years, which successive Ministers for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, and Justice, Equality and Law Reform considered.

Let us not forget that a full sworn inquiry into this matter took place and that a comprehensive system designed to help the families involved was established. Politicians, including the then Taoiseach, and the then Attorney General, Mr. John Rogers, made huge efforts to deal with these issues in the 1980s. With the passage of time, new issues arose, particularly in respect of DNA, a matter with which we have since dealt. I understand the nature of the grieving process and I accept that people were not sure or could never be certain about their loved ones being identified and asked that the matter be addressed.

In terms of technical issues, the tribunal concluded that it was arson——

It was not arson.

——but the relatives put forward their own claims in their submission. I cannot supply an exact date in respect of this matter. My officials have been trying to press the people who have the relevant technical competence to deal with this matter.

The first tribunal did not have access to vital information.

We have accepted that the information has been provided in good faith. However, I cannot make an assessment because I am not a forensic scientist, an architect or an engineer. I have given careful consideration to the matter, taken on board the submissions and listened to the relatives, their advisers and Mr. Greg O'Neill. I spoke to the relatives and understand the hurt they have suffered for 25 years. When the competent authorities provide me with an answer, I will gladly supply it. I cannot do any more than that. I sincerely say to the relatives that they have fought long and hard in respect of this matter and as soon as the information becomes available — it will be a matter of weeks rather than months before this happens — I will supply it. I cannot be pinned to a date in that regard. I checked the position in recent days before making an announcement yesterday regarding the exhumations. I accept Deputy Rabbitte's bona fides in respect of this matter and as soon as the information is communicated to me, I will make it available.