asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs whether the information given to the news media on the first day of the Sunningdale Conference and described by the news media as a "leak" from Irish Government sources was given with the authority of a member of the Government; and, if so, why such information was given.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Sunningdale Conference Leak.
30.
A briefing was given to the news media on my authority at a time in the conference when, it was understood, such a briefing was in order.
Is it not a fact that the information given in the briefing referred to by the Minister was false and that the giving of it seriously endangered the Sunningdale Conference?
No. The information given was not false at the time when it was given. It did not endanger the Sunningdale Conference. I explained what had happened to the other participants and this explanation was fully accepted. The fact was that briefing was given to the Press at an early stage in the conference, the very beginning. Later——
(Interruptions).
Order, please.
I am trying to inform the Deputy and the House but if they interrupt me I cannot do it. After the time when the briefing was given a decision was taken by the conference itself to place an embargo on Press releases, not to have Press briefings or releases. Initially, a misunderstanding prevailed to the effect that the briefing given by our delegation had been given after the embargo when, in fact, it was given before. If, of course, it had been given after the embargo it would have been a breach of faith and there was genuine concern expressed by some other delegations about the point. However, our explanation, when given, was fully and, I might say, cordially accepted by all parties and this episode was then happily closed.
Arising further out of the Minister's reply, in view of the fact that he stated that the information, when given, was not false—in other words, was correct but that it subsequently was inaccurate—are we to take it that the conference changed a decision which it had already made? Are we to take it that it changed that decision because of the leak by the Minister?
The Deputy is at liberty to take any inference he wishes from my answer to which I have nothing to add.
Significantly!
I may say the Deputy is much given to flogging dead horses and he is flogging a particularly dead horse on this occasion. I should also like to put on record the Government's appreciation of the increased effectiveness of the Government Information Service.
The remaining questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper.