I am aware of and respect the fact that the Cregan commission of investigation is under way and I will not comment on the substance of that inquiry. A statement was issued this week by the former CEO of IBRC in which he expressed concern regarding the costs of the ongoing Cregan commission of investigation into IBRC, including matters relating to Siteserv. I share these concerns about the escalating costs. When I raised the issue in the House last November, I asked the Taoiseach about the status of Mr. Justice Cregan's request for doubling of the legal fees for those working on the investigation. I have yet to receive an answer.

I did not want to see a costly and lengthy tribunal-type affair. This month marks the seventh anniversary of the final report of the Moriarty tribunal and even at this stage we are not really much clearer in terms of an outcome from that. While I share the concerns expressed in the statement on costs by the former CEO of IBRC, I take serious issue with the other blatantly spurious allegations made in the statement. I wish to be clear about my co-operation with the Cregan commission of inquiry. From the outset, I have engaged willingly and wholeheartedly with the commission. I submitted a significant body of research material and signed an affidavit to the commission accompanying my substantial evidence. Where necessary, I have liaised back and forth to help clarify issues raised. I have also been exceptionally clear in my position that at no point would I endanger the people who came forward to me at various points over the course of my lengthy and thorough research into IBRC by revealing their identities. When I engaged with people, I gave an undertaking that they could have confidence in my maintaining confidentiality. At all times, I will uphold that undertaking. I have made that abundantly clear. This does not constitute non-cooperation. Under no circumstances should my refusal to reveal private sources undermine the evidence I have presented to the commission.

On the previous occasion on which I raised this issue, I asked the Taoiseach to confirm my understanding that the commission of inquiry is answerable to the Dáil. The Taoiseach said he would find out. Will the Tánaiste confirm that the commission is indeed answerable to the Dáil? Will the Tánaiste outline to the Dáil how Mr. Justice Cregan's request for the doubling of legal fees has been handled to date? If the increase was to be granted from which Department will the money come? Will the Tánaiste confirm how many lawyers are involved in the commission of investigation at this point, which firms are involved and who do they represent? Does the Tánaiste have a figure for the legal bills associated with the commission to date? Does the Tánaiste have an agreed date for the completion of the Siteserv module?

There are a lot of detailed questions there. Following consultations with the Opposition parties by the former Minister for Finance, the commission of investigation into IBRC was established in June 2015. Mr. Justice Brian Cregan, a judge of the High Court, is the commission's sole member. In November 2015 the commission made a determination that banker-client confidentiality and legal professional privilege applied in respect of certain documents supplied to the commission. The commission also requested a number of changes to its terms of reference. Views from the Opposition parties were sought on the issues arising and, following consultations with the parties, the Commission of Investigation (Irish Bank Resolution Corporation) Act 2016 was enacted by the Oireachtas in July 2016. The Act is a bespoke piece of legislation giving a new legal basis to the commission's investigations. Following consultations with the Opposition parties, the terms of reference were also amended by the Oireachtas and now provide that in its first module the commission will investigate the Siteserv transaction, which has been identified as a matter of significant priority for Dáil Éireann. The commission is entirely independent in its work and I have no information on the status of its investigation to date. Last December, following a request from the commission and consultation with Opposition parties, the timeframe for the final report on the first module of its investigation was extended to the end of this year.

At the end of January, the commission had spent just over €3 million. This figure includes salaries for the commission staff, legal fees for counsel engaged by the commission and the commission's administration requirements. The figure does not include significant third party legal fees and costs that have been incurred and that will arise for payment in due course. In its fourth interim report, which was laid before the Oireachtas in December 2017, the commission did not make any estimate of the likely cost of the first module of its investigation. During consultations with Opposition parties last November, the Department provided a tentative estimated final cost for the commission of between €20 million and €25 million. This is based on the current rate of expenditure, the extended timeframe for the commission's work, the risk of further delays and the significant third-party legal and other costs that will arise. This is a reminder to all of us as to the costs to the taxpayer of commissions of this type.

This is the reason why having things done in real time is so important. Will the Tánaiste confirm whether the commission reports to the Dáil? This is very important. On the legal fees - and these are the questions I asked - what response has been given to Mr. Justice Cregan with regard to that request? Mr. Justice Cregan sought a doubling of the legal fees last year. Will the Tánaiste please respond to those two specific points?

The commission is entirely independent. It is not going to be influenced by the Dáil regarding the content of its inquiry or its conclusions. It will make its own decisions on the basis of the evidence heard. I assume that once it has actually been finalised. the report will be laid before the Houses. I presume there will be a debate on the back of that, as has been the case with commission reports in other instances.

On the legal fees, I am not aware that the Government has agreed to significantly increase the funding that is available for estimated increases in legal costs.