I wish to raise the issue of the sale of State-owned assets by IBRC and the inquiry into their sale, in addition to the difficulties and obstacles that have now been identified by the chairman of the inquiry and as revealed in The Sunday Business Post via a leak of some sort. The issues are very serious, and the Taoiseach will recall the background to them. The sale of Siteserv to a Denis O'Brien-owned company at a loss of €119 million to the taxpayer was the prime catalyst for the initiation of the inquiry into that deal and other deals about which it subsequently emerged senior civil servants in the Department of Finance had concerns. It is fair to say the Government was dragged kicking and screaming to the stage of establishing an inquiry. There was reluctance and, indeed, a refusal to answer parliamentary questions. The concerns of the senior officials in the Department of Finance were forced into being released through freedom of information requests. The doggedness and tenacity of Deputy Catherine Murphy are to be commended in that regard. All along, there was reluctance.

KPMG, the company that advised on the sale of Siteserv originally, was asked by the Minister for Finance to conduct the inquiry, incredible as that now seems. Eventually, with all the opposition, he capitulated and handed it over to the Taoiseach who appointed Mr. Justice Daniel O'Keeffe. A month later, Mr. Justice O'Keeffe had to withdraw for personal reasons and Mr. Justice Brian Cregan was appointed to the chair. This week we learned that the Taoiseach was alerted last Thursday or Friday that there were major obstacles. Today, the judge is saying to the Cabinet that he cannot proceed with this inquiry.

It is a litany of incompetence at best and maybe a degree of convenience as well. The Government thought it might have parked all the controversies some time ago, but it is extraordinary the degree to which it seems impossible to get any information or any inquiry going concerning the sale of Siteserv and other issues.

A question please.

Is the Taoiseach saying that Government officials did not know about any of this until this week? On 22 August, there was an article in The Irish Times by Cliff Taylor flagging concerns of this kind and indicating that Government officials are saying they are confident that any legal concerns can be overcome to allow the formal handover of documentation to get under way in earnest. It identified issues at that time. We have also learned that Department of Finance officials confirmed in this morning's Irish Examiner that they had taken legal advice and had not waived their rights in relation to the release of documents.

Would the Deputy put a question?

If Department of Finance officials are taking legal advice on this very issue and are refusing to waive their rights in relation to the release of documents, how is it that the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach knew nothing about it until Thursday or Friday? Is it credible that the Attorney General did not flag this issue to the Cabinet in advance of the establishment of the commission of investigation? Will the Taoiseach undertake to publish the Attorney General's advice that was given to the Government prior to the establishment of the commission?

Deputy Martin has outlined the background to this particular issue. I will start by saying that I do not know of anybody in the House who does not want this matter dealt with thoroughly, comprehensively-----

Look in the mirror.

-----and in an absolutely accountable way in the public interest. That is my opening position. The Department of the Taoiseach is the receiving Department for reports from Mr. Justice Cregan in respect of this matter. Discussions would have taken place when Mr. Justice O'Keeffe was dealing with this because he was beginning to handle it at that stage. He then had to retire because of personal reasons and, as Deputy Martin pointed out, Mr. Justice Cregan has taken over.

For the information of the House, at its Cabinet meeting today, the Government reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring that there be a full and independent investigation of the issues that were raised in relation to the IBRC matter and the transactions therein. The Attorney General briefed the Government on a number of legal issues and potential options that are open to ensure this can be achieved. The Government noted that a number of significant legal issues arise which need consideration.

I will briefly set out for Members of the House the sequence of events. On 9 June, following consultation by the Minister for Finance with the Opposition parties, the Government approved the draft order establishing the commission of investigation into certain matters concerning transactions entered into by IBRC. The draft order was then laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas and approved, following debate in both Houses. Subsequently, on 15 June, the Government established the commission. Following the resignation of Mr. Justice O'Keeffe for personal reasons, Mr. Justice Cregan was appointed as chair of the commission on 9 July. I was designated as the responsible Minister under the Act so the judge sends his formal reports to me and his work is funded through the Vote of my Department. He is completely independent in the conduct of his investigation.

Last Thursday, 5 November, Mr. Justice Cregan and his legal team met, at his request, with officials from my Department and the Office of the Attorney General. At that meeting he outlined legal issues he had considered in relation to the use of documents which were either confidential or subject to legal privilege and stated that he had made a determination in this regard. The official asked that his position be outlined urgently in writing to me as the responsible Minister under the Commissions of Investigation Act. The determination by the judge was not given to my Department at that meeting although it was sent by Mr. Justice Cregan to the Department of Finance later that day and therefore has been available to the Attorney General for her consideration of the matter.

I received a letter from Mr. Justice Cregan the following day, last Friday, 6 November. This letter referred to the determination of the judge and the commission on issues of confidentiality and privilege, which means that, in the words of the letter, "it is not in a position to proceed with this investigation into any of the relevant write-off transactions". The letter also stated that the commission is in the process of preparing an interim report to me, as the specified Minister, which will outline the work of the commission to date and the issues which have arisen. It will also seek an extension of time for the completion of the work of the commission. The interim report can be finalised only after the commission has consulted any person who is identified in or identifiable from the draft report.

On receipt of that letter from Mr. Justice Cregan, I immediately requested advice from the Attorney General on the implications of this determination and the legal options that are open to ensure the House can have an investigation which is fully transparent and accountable and that can be completed in an effective and timely manner. I will arrange to have the judge's letter published today.

The Government was informed this morning that Mr. Justice Cregan has decided to publish his determination both in respect of the issue of confidentiality in regard to the special liquidator and the Department of Finance. I understand this has been done and I welcome the judge's decision to publish in order that all concerned can debate in a transparent fashion the issues involved.

The Government was also informed this morning of a request from Mr. Justice Cregan that it would be preferable for the Government to receive his interim report before deciding on the course of action it should take. This is also the view of the Attorney General who cannot, in fairness, give formal legal advice to the Cabinet in the absence of the judge's interim report. I understand that the report should be available shortly as the consultations were under way and dealt with on Friday last.

The importance of the issue - the question of confidentiality and legal professional privilege - raises extensive legal issues which have been considered in detail by the commission over recent months. Given that importance, that the terms of reference for the commission were prepared following consultation with the Opposition parties, and that the order establishing the commission was approved by the Houses of the Oireachtas, I believe the questions that have arisen should be considered by all the parties and the Members of the House before a decision is made on the best way to proceed.

I also hope Mr. Justice Cregan will be in a position to submit his interim report to me formally, as the receiving Minister, at the earliest possible date. I will then commit to publishing that in accordance with the law and also to discussing it with Opposition Members and in the House in order that we can identify what needs to be done following the judicial determination and move on to achieve the ambition of accountable, transparent analysis of all the transactions in what was in excess of a €10 million write-off.

The Taoiseach did not answer any of the questions I asked. Not one.

Ten minutes of waffle.

I asked a very simple question. Is the Taoiseach saying that Government officials were not aware of any of this until this week? Why are Department of Finance officials confirming that the Minister for Finance and the Department of Finance have refused to waive their rights in relation to the release of documents? Will the Taoiseach please explain why the Department of Finance is doing that? It was confirmed by its officials yesterday. In that very decision, clearly being aware that this was an issue for some time, the former IBRC chairman, Alan Dukes, is confirming he discussed it with the chairman of the investigation two months ago.

On 22 August, an article on these issues was published in The Irish Times. Did the Attorney General, in her advice to Government, flag this issue with the Taoiseach at any stage prior to the establishment of the commission of investigation?

There must have been advice at that stage, so will the Taoiseach now publish it? It seems incredible - it does not seem credible - that these substantive issues were not raised with the Government and the Taoiseach in advance of the setting up of the commission of investigation. That would seem to have been a major omission.

Fundamentally, is the Taoiseach saying to me categorically that no officials in either the Department of Finance, the Department of the Taoiseach or elsewhere were aware of this issue prior to this week? Can the Taoiseach clarify that?

Why has the Department of Finance refused to waive its rights? We have an extraordinary situation, it seems, from the evidence of Mr. Dukes, whereby KPMG, a State-appointed liquidator to the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation, is claiming privilege over these documents, as is the Department of Finance. This relates to the activities of a State bank handling assets belonging to the people and involving write-offs concerning the people.

The public generally will be looking at this with the view that when it comes to the powerful and wealthy the Government never really goes too far with the inquiries. That is a problem in terms of the public's perception of how obstacle after obstacle can be put in the way of getting to some truths about basic issues raised. These issues were first seriously alerted to the public, the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance by senior civil servants in the Department of Finance. It was not media hype, as some would suggest. It was done by senior civil servants in the Department of Finance. They flagged real concerns to the Minister, Deputy Noonan, some time back on the sale of Siteserv and the sale of other assets. However, the Government chose to do nothing about those concerns until it was forced into the open through freedom of information requests. That is the sad reality. The Government was dragged kicking and screaming to where we are today. Again, we are empty-handed in terms of any succour for the general public and their wish to know what went on.

I wish to make the point to Deputy Martin, as I did before, that Fianna Fáil was forthright in welcoming the setting up of the commission of investigation into certain matters relating to IBRC.

Answer the question.

I made the point that the establishment of the statutory investigation was a rare victory for our parliamentary democracy. Everyone, despite their initial political comments, welcomed the fact that the commission of investigation was being set up.

What about the officials?

It would be great to get an answer to the question.

The Department of the Taoiseach is the receiving Department for the report or reports that will come from Mr. Justice Cregan. The Department of Finance is party to the investigation by the commission into this matter. Therefore, of course, the work of the commission will be outlined in the interim report from Mr. Justice Cregan. Obviously, he will outline the contacts and the consultations that he had with all interested parties, including the Department of Finance.

They knew. Is that correct?

They are a party to the investigation being conducted by the commission.

They knew and they did not tell the Taoiseach. Is that what the Taoiseach is saying?

Please. We are seven minutes over time.

No. Deputy Martin is going a little too far with me.

Is he too quick for the Taoiseach?

The point is that the Department of Finance is part of the investigation by the commission into the sale of the assets in respect of IBRC. Therefore, the justice, in moving through the process, has to be in contact with interested parties. He has now made a determination, following that process, that he cannot go any further because of the issues of confidentiality.

That does not answer my question. Is the Taoiseach saying that Department of Finance officials knew?

The Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, commented the other day to the effect that all of the requests made at the Department of Finance in regard of this matter were sent in unredacted form to the commission when they were requested.

Sorry; there are other Deputies here and we are eight minutes over.

Does that mean Department of Finance officials did not know?

Obviously, as has happened in the vast majority of other cases, they carry a warning in respect of confidentiality.

Not necessarily.

In the past, in the conduct of a number of commissions, the question of confidentiality was overruled in the public interest, which is what we want here. However, no justice in the past has equated the question of confidentiality with that of privilege.

I waived confidentiality on documents in a previous inquiry as a Minister.

The Act drawn up in 2004-----

It is open to the Minister for Finance to waive all rights relating to the release of documents if he wants to. It has been done before.

Sorry. I have to ask you to finish, Taoiseach.

The draft of the Act drawn up by the late Attorney General did not distinguish between the questions of confidentiality and privilege.

In the determination published on the commission's website, Mr. Justice Cregan has made a number of observations. He made a request this morning that the Cabinet would not take a course of action until the interim report is received from him, and I respect that. Anyway, work was already under way in respect of the possibilities and options that need to be followed by the Office of the Attorney General. Let me repeat again that it is the single determination-----

Can the Taoiseach confirm whether Department of Finance officials knew?

It is the single determination of the Government to see-----

Is the answer to my question "Yes"? That is all. Is it "Yes" or "No"? Did they know before last week?

Sorry, Taoiseach. I have to ask you to finish, please.

I asked a straight question. Did they know before last week? Can the Taoiseach not tell me whether they knew?

No.

Why does the Taoiseach have to keep going on, obstructing and not giving clear answers to questions asked?

We are ten minutes over on that question.

I cannot get a clear answer. Did they know?

Deputy Adams is next. Thank you.

Will the Taoiseach state whether they knew before last week?