I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 14 together.

The IBRC Commission of Investigation was established in June 2015 following consultation with Oireachtas parties to investigate certain transactions, activities and management decisions at the IBRC, beginning with the Siteserv transaction in its first module. The commission’s original deadline for reporting was 31 December 2015 but following requests from the commission and after consultation with Oireachtas parties, its timeframe for reporting was extended on multiple occasions.

The commission’s report on the Siteserv transaction was received in July 2022 and it was subsequently published and debated in the Dáil and Seanad. In October 2022, the then Taoiseach accepted the commission’s recommendation in its 13th interim report that it should not pursue investigation of the remaining 37 transactions covered by its terms of reference as it is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by investigating them. Accordingly, the commission’s investigation is now complete other than finalising its work on the costs payable to witnesses who appeared before it.

The commission originally envisaged that it would complete its work on costs by the end of March 2023 but in its 15th interim report, dated 16 March 2023, the commission requested an extension until the end of May 2023 to complete this work. I granted the commission’s request and arranged for a copy of its 15th interim report to be published and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

From the time of its establishment in June 2015, to the end of March 2023, the commission spent approximately €13.1 million. This figure does not include third-party legal costs which have been incurred but not paid and which are a matter for the commission to determine. The final cost for the commission will become clear only when all the cost orders are made and when any possible legal challenges that may arise are resolved.

This extension is to deal with the costs and any legal challenges, meaning this may not be the last extension. The IBRC Commission of Investigation was set up under the 2004 Act. That bespoke legislation effectively turned the commission of investigation into a tribunal but behind closed doors. It dealt with one of 38 transactions. A very comprehensive report found that the transaction was not commercially sound because it was so tainted by impropriety. We need to consider if we have the apparatus in the State to catch things in real time. For example, does the Corporate Enforcement Agency have the capacity where investigations are required to be done, including ones that actually will challenge some very powerful people? Do we need to revisit what apparatus we have? Despite the time it took, it dealt with only one transaction, albeit it was a very comprehensive report. We need either a Government or an all-party approach to looking at how we deal with things in a timely and cost-effective manner in the future. We either need to invest in real-time strong enforcement or we if we are going to be dealing with it through inquiries afterwards, those inquiries need to be cost effective and timely. I do not think we have that at the moment.

In its interim report, the commission noted that the State Claims Agency provides it with considerable assistance with witnesses' costs applications. Indeed, the agency is a significant entity in terms of purchasing legal services. It was previously reported that the State Claims Agency, the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, had all refused to sign up to the Bar of Ireland's equitable briefing policy to promote equality of opportunity for female barristers. Is this still the case?

The Minister of State, Deputy James Browne, attended the launch of the Bar of Ireland's policy and told attendees that embedding gender equality, human rights, diversity and inclusion in the legal profession is a priority for Government. He also correctly said that actions speak louder than words. What action has Government taken over recent months to resolve this matter? Can we expect the State Claims Agency, the Office of the DPP and the Office of the Attorney General to sign up to the equitable briefing policy which includes a confidential reporting mechanism to monitor and measure progress? Can the Taoiseach offer us a rationale or a rational basis for the Attorney General, the DPP and the State Claims Agency refusing to sign up to this policy in the first place?

It is worth reminding ourselves what is the essence of this. What was being investigated was a massive rip-off and loss for the public to the tune of €118 million written off by IBRC, formerly Anglo Irish Bank, to the benefit of the Denis O'Brien-owned Siteserv. The fundamental conclusion is that the IBRC was misled by Siteserv directors over the transaction. The phrase "tainted with impropriety" is mentioned an incredible 44 times in the report. In that context, it is very unfortunate that 37 other transactions will not be investigated. They were identified on the basis that they were transactions where the bank suffered a net loss of at least €10 million each. Given the findings of what happened with Siteserv, whereby the public was definitely ripped off, there is a possibility that similar practices took place in those other instances. While I understand the complexity of pursuing some of these issues, simply to say "No, we can't go there" is quite unfortunate.

Tomorrow night the now multi-award-winning film about the Debenhams dispute will be shown here in the audiovisual room. The Taoiseach is invited, by the way, direct from the shop stewards. Vincent Browne will be hosting a question-and-answer panel afterwards. The film highlights very serious questions about, obviously, the treatment of the Debenhams workers, but also how the whole insolvency was handled - certainly questions and possible corporate impropriety for which those workers suffered very grievously. As I think I mentioned to the Taoiseach previously, I, some of the workers and some of the filmmakers brought to the Corporate Enforcement Authority some of the stuff we found out, some of which is portrayed in the film if the Taoiseach gets see it. It will go on general release in week or two.

This relates to Deputy Paul Murphy's point about Siteserv.

If somebody steals something in a shop, the police are called and the person can be chased up and potentially prosecuted and imprisoned very quickly. The Corporate Enforcement Authority, however, essentially has no resources to do anything. When we told it there are very serious questions, it said that while it took on board what we were saying, it was restricted in its ability to tell us if it even found anything. It was not even clear to me to whom it reports. The contrast between the way white-collar impropriety or outright crime is pursued as against what happens to ordinary people who may be accused of crime is pretty stark. This is what this sort of thing highlights. Does the Taoiseach not think this needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency?

I also asked about the equitable briefing policy and the failure of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and other offices to sign off.

I apologise to the Deputy. I do not believe I have the answer to that question but I will come back to the Deputy by correspondence on that.

I appreciate that.

There were a number of questions here, the responses for which did not relate to the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation commission of investigation, so I might come back to Deputies by correspondence if that is okay.

As this refers to service matters, I have asked the Health Service Executive (HSE) to respond to the Deputy directly, as soon as possible.