asked the Minister for Justice if he is correctly reported on the 4th November, 1962, as having stated that he believed that poteen making was a comparatively harmless activity.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Poteen Making.
51.
I am glad to have this opportunity of correcting any misunderstandings which might arise from the newspaper reports in question. Every possible effort is being, and will continue to be made, by my Department and the Garda Síochána, in co-operation with the Revenue authorities, to stamp out this traffic.
Am I to understand from the Minister that he did not say, as reported in the Sunday Press of the 4th of this month, that he exercised his prerogative in remitting part of a sentence because he believed that poteen making was a comparatively harmless activity?
I want to say, first of all, that, as the Deputy knows, the meetings of the Literary and Historical Society are on occasion fairly noisy. I think that this is the reason that what I said was probably misunderstood by some of those present. My actual words in relation to poteen making were "what appeared to him to be a comparatively harmless activity." I should also add that on the occasion in question I was telling a story which everybody present realised was related to a completely improbable set of events. I was, in fact, telling what was intended to be a funny story. I feel that my remarks on that occasion should have been interpreted in the spirit in which they were offered.
Tell us the story.
Does the Minister not agree now that his joke was in as bad taste as that of the district justice whom he correctly rebuked a moment ago?
I do not agree at all. As I have said, the remarks I actually made were: "what appeared to him to be a comparatively harmless activity". At no stage did I give it as my opinion——
The Minister should give up telling stories.
This is another Irish Press untruth?
Does the Minister confess he is a bad comedian? On that understanding, he is allowed off.
Thank you.