asked the Minister for Justice if he has seen the report on the Irish Hospital Sweepstakes; if he is satisfied that the national interest is being served under the present arrangement; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
53.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Irish Hospital Sweepstakes.
52.
asked the Minister for Justice if it is proposed to nationalise the Irish Hospital Sweepstakes; and if he will make a statement on recent press reports regarding the administration of the Sweepstakes.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 52 and 53 together.
The legislation under which the sweepstakes are conducted has been on the Statute Book for some 40 years. Additionally, the audited accounts of each sweepstake are supplied, individually, to each member of the Oireachtas. Accordingly, the broad financial aspects of the operation have been open to public scrutiny throughout that period. A review of the operation at the present moment is not a matter of priority for me though it is, naturally, a matter which, like all aspects of my Department's work, I shall look at in due course.
I should like to make it clear that what I have said is not to be taken as implying that I accept the financial analysis made in the newspaper article to which, I assume, the questions refer.
Would it be true that a certain appointment was made to the Seanad as a result of these questions?
That does not seem to be relevant.
The Deputy should not impute to this side of the House the standards he might apply to——
Will the Minister answer one question? Forty years ago, what way did the present Taoiseach's father vote in relation to this Act?
Forty years ago is not relevant just now.
I can tell you, Sir, the present Taoiseach's father voted against this Act.
Question No. 54.
Is the Minister——
I have called Question No. 54.
I think I am entitled to ask a supplementary question. Is the Minister aware that there is a good deal of disquiet about Irish Hospital Sweepstakes for a number of reasons and would he be prepared to continue the investigation which I endeavoured to carry out in relation to the sweepstakes while I was in the Department of Justice with a view to trying to elucidate many matters which are unclear, to say the least of it?
I am not aware that there is disquiet beyond such as may have been excited by a newspaper article, the financial analysis of which I am not competent to deal with at this stage. With regard to the latter part of the Deputy's supplementary, there are other matters in the Department of Justice in which I could dig with a lot more profit for this State.
Were there investigations already afoot when the Minister assumed office?
Every aspect of the Department of Justice comes under investigation from time to time because the administration of a Department is an ongoing matter and this particular facet of the Department's activities is naturally reviewed from time to time. The point I have made in my reply is that I do not consider this a matter of priority for me at the moment. I consider that there are more urgent matters to which I have to give prior attention.
Would the Minister agree that there were some disclosures which were not known before hand, that certainly the audited figures and balance sheet that were presented to Members of the Oireachtas were far from enlightening with regard to the innermost secrets of Hospitals Sweepstakes? Secondly, were the investigations initiated as a result of the newspaper reports and disclosures?
I am not saying there were any investigations, in the sense that the Deputy seems to imply, carried out as a result of the newspaper article to which he refers. I am not qualified professionally to judge the competence or otherwise of the audits presented to each Member of the Oireachtas but I understand they are certified by competent professional people and I think it is unfair to impugn them here.
Do I take it from what the Minister has said in reply to my previous supplementary that he does not propose to continue the efforts which I made over a period of about two years, not just since the newspaper article in question, to find out more information about matters which are far from clear?
What I said was that a review of the operation at the present moment is not a matter of priority for me. That is not to say I rule out such matters but as I have already indicated there are other areas connected with the Department of Justice in which I think I could root out matters much more fruitful and, perhaps, of greater interest to this House.
Has the Minister come to any decision with regard to the question of the commission on the fourth annual sweepstake which was instituted in the last few years?
This is a matter of detail that I am not aware of. Until such time as I review this question in detail I cannot answer that question.
The failure of the Minister to show any willingness to look into these matters would seem to be——
Is the Deputy asking a question?
——connected with the appointment we heard of last night.
The Minister has not indicated any unwillingness. What the Minister has said is that this is not a matter of high priority.
The long finger again.
If the Deputy wants me to dig urgently in my Department there are many matters I could dig up which would not suit the Opposition.