We are now approaching the sixth anniversary of the Taoiseach's occupying his office, if we get that far, but it is also the sixth anniversary of the final report of the Moriarty Tribunal of Inquiry into Payments to Politicians and Related Matters and the fifth anniversary of the final report of the Flood-Mahon Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments. On several occasions since these reports were published in 2011 and 2012 I have asked Ministers for Justice and Equality to comment on the status of investigations by An Garda Síochána and possible action by the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, into the findings of Flood-Mahon and Moriarty and generally received very brief holding replies or just complete brush-offs. I believe that other Deputies have had similar experiences.

In January 2015, for example the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, said "following the examination of the Garda Síochána of the report of the Moriarty Tribunal, the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions was sought with a view to determining whether or not a full Garda investigation should be commenced". She also said "the Garda authorities have also been engaged in an examination of the Report of the Mahon Tribunal which was referred to the Garda Commissioner by the Government". On 24 March 2015, the Minister replied to my query on whether she had received a report from An Garda Síochána to the questions I had submitted in late 2014. The Minister then said that she was "informed by the Garda authorities that the position in relation to these matters remains the same". A few months later on 26 May 2015, I submitted further questions relating to these investigations and was told that an “examination is ongoing at present” of both tribunal findings.

In the last weeks of the Thirty-first Dáil, on Thursday, 21 January this year, I inquired from the Minister about the resources within the Department, including staff and the budget that she was allocating to follow up on issues raised in the Flood-Mahon and Moriarty reports. In her reply, she assured me that "all appropriate resources are available" and that detailed consideration had to be given to "the full suites of recommendations" made by the Moriarty tribunal and to the judgments of the Supreme Court. On 2 November last, I again asked the Minister for Justice and Equality about this and in a follow-up letter she stated:

I am now informed by the Garda authorities that investigations relating to the findings of the Flood and Mahon Tribunals as well as the investigation of certain matters arising from the report of the Moriarty Tribunal are ongoing. I am also advised that relevant liaison is maintained with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

She also said the overriding concern for An Garda Síochána is to ensure these investigations are carried out as "comprehensively and effectively as possible".

After the experience of these two incredibly long tribunals, we are well aware of the limitations on the use of evidence gathered and the impact of various court challenges on their findings.

Is the Taoiseach concerned that a series of parliamentary questions from myself and colleagues has been met with this kind of non-answer? Is he concerned that these questions have never been directly answered? I acknowledge that several of the key recommendations of the Flood-Mahon and Moriarty tribunals on the public funding of politics, the regulation and registration of lobbyists, the protection of whistleblowers and the establishment of a planning regulator have been partially or fully implemented. However, is it not time that the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality gave the House a full report on the actions and investigations being taken on foot of the reports of these tribunals, which fundamentally affected the Taoiseach's party and Fianna Fáil?

The Moriarty tribunal recommendations were aimed at breaking the link between big money and politics. As the Deputy pointed out, that was achieved through the enactment of the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012, which effectively banned corporate donations. The Government published comprehensive legislation on the protection of whistleblowers and on the registration of lobbyists. The recommendations of the Moriarty tribunal were, as the Deputy knows, grouped into five different areas: political funding, company law, revenue matters, regulations and tribunals of inquiry.

In respect of political funding, the Electoral (Amendment) (Political Funding) Act 2012 was enacted on 28 July that year. The Act brought into force restrictions in corporate donations and considerable reductions in the maximum amount that a political party or individual could accept as a political donation. The Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO, has published guidelines for political parties on the steps to be taken in receiving donations and on prohibited donations. There are also published guidelines for the registration of corporate donors. Under the 2012 Act, there is a requirement that political parties submit audited accounts for SIPO for publication. This requirement began with the 2015 accounts, which had to be submitted by mid-2016. Such requirements mandate that both the income and the expenditure of the political parties be open to scrutiny, which goes beyond the recommendations of the Moriarty tribunal.

The Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices) (Amendment) Act 2014 reduced the levels of payment made to political leaders and Independent Members and provides that Independent Members are now required to furnish to SIPO an annual statement of expenditure. Also relevant in that regard is the Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015. As we have seen in recent days, a web-based register of lobbying has been developed by SIPO and is designed to bring greater transparency in respect of those communicating with public officials on policy matters.

In respect of company law, the Moriarty tribunal recommended that a provision similar to section 172 of the UK Companies Act 2006 be adopted in respect of establishing a post of director of statutory duties. The then Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, stated that he considered the matter to be covered under Part 5 of the Companies Act 2014, which came into force on 1 June of that year.

In the context of matters relating to Revenue, section 101 of the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 2011 placed on a statutory footing the independence of the Revenue Commissioners exercising the statutory functions provided to them under enactments relating to taxation and customs.

In regulation, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, has identified a number of specific actions, including the introduction of a new fitness and probity regime in accordance with the Central Bank Reform Act. The Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013 attempts to strengthen the ability of the Central Bank to impose and supervise compliance with regulatory requirements and to undertake timely prudential interventions.

On tribunals, the Moriarty tribunal made a number of observations and the Tribunals of Inquiry Bill 2005 awaits Report Stage in the Dáil. While not directly related to the operation of tribunals of inquiry, the introduction of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 should be noted.

The Public Sector Standards Bill 2015 has passed Second Stage. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform is dealing with it. He expects to bring it before the House again by the middle of next year to deal with the appointment of a commissioner for tribunals, a matter that arises on foot of the provisions contained in that legislation.

I note the litany of measures the Taoiseach has just listed that were taken following the recommendations of both of those tribunals. Ultimately, our constituents want full accountability for decisions. I do not think the Taoiseach in any way addressed the fundamental question I asked him. Can he outline what resources are available to the Revenue Commissioners, the Criminal Assets Bureau, the Bureau of Fraud Investigation, the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation and other vital Garda agencies, such as the Director of Corporate Enforcement, SIPO and the Director of Public Prosecutions, to complete any and all ongoing investigations into the corruption revealed by the Flood-Mahon and Moriarty tribunals?

The Criminal Assets Bureau currently has a staffing complement of 71 which is the same as in 2013.

Will there be an interim report to Dáil Éireann on all of the key issues I have raised? Will the Taoiseach or the Minister for Justice and Equality indicate when a final report from An Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions will be sent to the Department and laid before the House regarding investigations into the findings of the Flood-Mahon and Moriarty tribunals?

I looked back over a speech I made in March 2012 on the Flood-Mahon tribunal findings. I noted the responsibility of the two big parties who are still in control of this House, that is, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. I said that they are different sides of the same coin in relation to, unfortunately-----

No, we are not.

----- all of the matters that were investigated. Perhaps we need to have a Government made up of other Deputies in this House to have these investigations concluded.

I have read out the list of legislation that has been enacted following the publication of the Moriarty tribunal report. The legislation was, as the Deputy knows, the subject of very intensive debate, discussion and scrutiny before being enacted. I also pointed out that the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform will be bringing the public sector standards Bill to the House. By the middle of next year he will be seeking the support of Members for that Bill so that a commissioner for tribunals can be appointed.

In respect of the Deputy's direct question about the amount of money and resources available to the Criminal Assets Bureau, I will ask the Minister for Justice and Equality to respond to him directly. I cannot give him a date for an overall response from the Department of Justice and Equality but I will update him on the work that is ongoing in the Department.