asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the result of the representations made on 2nd July, 1975 by the embassy in Brussels in the case of an Irish citizen (name supplied).
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Irish Citizen in Brussels.
3.
It is not the practice to make public the result of representations made to another Government. The embassy in Brussels is, of course, continuing to do everything appropriate to be of whatever assistance possible to the accused and will, needless to say, keep in close contact with the Belgian authorities in the matter.
Would the Minister accept that diplomatic jargon is not of much use——
We have had enough of it today.
——to an Irish citizen imprisoned in Belgium for practically two months and would the Minister say whether or not he has used his good offices to intercede or make inquiries on behalf of the man in question?
The answer is in the affirmative as, I think, my reply indicated. I said it is not the practice to make public the result of representations made to another Government.
Would the Minister indicate why it took him—I am referring now to an earlier answer I got —more than six weeks to intercede on behalf of this Irish citizen?
The representations made related to the situation as it developed. I do not want to go further into it in the interests of the accused.
In the interests of the accused, I am asking the Minister whether he has made direct representations to his counterpart in Belgium on behalf of the alleged accused?
Representations have been made as, I think, the Deputy is aware.
I know representations have been made and I am sure the boy in prison in Belgium will be fortified to know the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs treats his imprisonment as a joke. However, that is only an aside. Would the Minister say to me—again, I appreciate the Minister's mirth at this boy's imprisonment—that he has interested himself to the extent of making personal inquiry on behalf of the boy in question?
The Deputy's reference to mirth is, I am afraid misplaced. The Deputy left himself open to a riposte by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and I reacted to that.
I know the Ministers are two of a kind.
We should be concerned here about action which might affect the accused. We have made representations of the kind which seemed most appropriate in the particular circumstances and most likely to be of assistance and less likely adversely to affect his position.
I think the Minister might stray beyond the limitations he has put on his reply to assure me that he is concerned. The Minister's Department told me that, notwithstanding the fact that this man had been for a period of six weeks in prison in Belgium, he had the benefit of a visit on two occasions from an official of the embassy——
A brief question, please.
——and I am asking the Minister now if he has personally communicated with his counterpart.
The Deputy has already asked that question.
I am waiting for a reply.
Would the Minister say "Yes" or "No". It is very precise.
The question, I am sorry to say, is not precise and, therefore, I did not answer precisely. Representations were made by the ambassador on my behalf to the Belgian Foreign Ministry in accordance with normal procedure.
The Minister did not make personal representations to his counterpart.
I did not. One wants to get results rather than newspaper headlines.
I am not looking for newspaper headlines and I resent the suggestion that I am looking for newspaper headlines.
This is leading to argument.
I made no allegations against the Deputy at all. I did not intend to do so.