Deputies' Allegations: Censure Motion.

The Taoiseach

I move:

That Dáil Éireann, recalling

(a) that serious allegations were made against a Member of this House, the Minister for Local Government, Deputy Tully, by Deputies Robert Molloy and Brendan Crinion, and repeated by them notwithstanding the denials of the Minister;

(b) that a Tribunal of Inquiry appointed by the Taoiseach pursuant to Resolutions of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann investigated the allegations and found that they were untrue;

(c) that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges considered the Report of the Tribunal and reported to Dáil Éireann on the 4th December, 1975, that Deputies Robert Molloy and Brendan Crinion were in grave breach of privilege in making the allegations,

(1) notes and approves the Report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on the matter;

(2) taking into account that the Deputies have publicly admitted that the allegations were untrue and have withdrawn them and have apologised to the Minister for having made them, is of the opinion that the appropriate action which Dáil Éireann should take arising from the grave breach of privilege involved is to express its strong condemnation of the actions of Deputies Robert Molloy and Brendan Crinion and to censure them for those actions.

The terms of this motion are self-explanatory and the matter has been before the Dáil recently enough for Deputies to recall the sequence of events.

The motion is to vindicate the reputation of the Minister for Local Government who, like any other Deputy, is entitled to have his good name untarnished by allegations without any basis in fact.

On the 12th December, 1974, an allegation was made against the Minister for Local Government by Deputy Molloy which the Minister denied. On the 25th June, 1975, Deputy Molloy again raised the matter and again the Minister denied the charge. On the 2nd July, 1975, the Minister made a personal statement in the Dáil denying the truth of the allegations. Deputy Molloy repeated the allegations in which he was supported by Deputy Crinion.

On the 2nd July, 1975, the Minister requested the Ceann Comhairle to refer the matter to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. On the 3rd July, the Committee reported that the Deputies concerned would not make any statement to the Committee and in the circumstances they were unable to investigate properly the matter before them.

On the 3rd July, I moved a motion to establish a tribunal under the Tribunal of Inquiry Evidence Act, 1921. This motion was passed by the Dáil on the 3rd July and on the 4th July a similar resolution was approved by Seanad Éireann.

On the 4th July prior to the resolution being discussed in the Seanad, Deputies Molloy and Crinion apologised in the Dáil and made statements in the matter.

The tribunal reported on the 31st July and this report was presented to each House of the Oireachtas on the 1st August, 1975. The report was subsequently printed and circulated to Members of the Dáil and Seanad on the 25th November, 1975.

On the 26th November I moved a motion referring the tribunal's report to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges for consideration and for a report thereon to the House. The Committee on Procedure and Privileges reported on the 4th December that Deputies Molloy and Crinion were in grave breach of privilege in making the allegations against the Minister for Local Government.

A motion that the report be laid before the Dáil and that the report and proceedings of the Committee be printed was agreed by the Dáil on the 10th December.

In view of the findings of the tribunal and the report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, I consider it appropriate that Dáil Éireann should pass the motion which I have moved and I so recommend.

Mr. J. Lynch

This motion is mean, petty, vindictive and totally unnecessary.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Mr. J. Lynch

I believe it was unnecessary that the Taoiseach should pursue the original motion to set up a tribunal once Deputies Molloy and Crinion had completely and unreservedly withdrawn the charges made against the Minister for Local Government and apologised in a manful and open way before this House. Admittedly that withdrawal and apology were made on the day after the Dáil passed the motion setting up the tribunal and only some short time before the motion was submitted for discussion in the Seanad.

The fact that the Minister for Local Government was absent from the vicinity of the House on that day—I believe he was engaged elsewhere— may have given some justification for the Taoiseach to proceed but he might have postponed the submission of the motion to the Seanad on that day until the following week when it would have been possible to consult with the Minister for Local Government. It would have been a praiseworthy action on their part had they not proceeded with the motion in the Seanad and moved to annul the motion passed in the Dáil.

We did not oppose the passing of the motion in the Dáil. I was the only speaker from this party on that day. I said that the Minister's reputation was entitled to be vindicated, if it was to be vindicated. I submit it was completely vindicated by the withdrawal and by the apology made by the Deputies on 4th July.

However, the Taoiseach and the Government did not see fit to withdraw the motion from the Seanad and to annul the motion passed by the Dáil. The Coalition were determined to have their pound of flesh. The tribunal was duly established. It sat and reported and its report is contained in the document PRI 4745. It comprises in the main two parts. Part I sets out the facts leading to the establishment of the tribunal and Part II sets out the sittings, evidence and the findings of the tribunal.

At paragraph 13 in Part I the report states:

In Dáil Éireann Deputy Molloy said he had been in touch with the three people who had given him the information

that is the information he alleged against the Minister for Local Government.

Two of them refused to have their names disclosed or to give evidence. The third person had satisfied Deputy Molloy that the allegations made to him by the other two on whose information he had relied were incorrect. In the circumstances he withdrew unreservedly the allegations made concerning the Minister and James Farrell. He wished to apologise to both men for any distress caused resulting from his statements in the Dáil. Deputy Crinion endorsed what Deputy Molloy had said. He withdrew unreservedly the allegations he had made in Dáil Éireann about the Minister and Mr. James Farrell. He wished to publicly apologise to both of them for any distress caused to them resulting from his statements in the Dáil.

In paragraph 13 of Part II of the report the following sentence appears:

With the solitary exception of the Locke Tribunal in 1947 no tribunal set up under the 1921 Act has investigated allegations made in Parliament.

That statement referred to a submission made in the course of the hearing at the tribunal by counsel for Deputy Molloy. I believe that the Locke Tribunal was in fact the only precedent we had of an inquiry into allegations made in the Dáil against a member or members of the Government or of the Oireachtas. These allegations, it will be recalled, were made at that time by Deputy Oliver Flanagan. The tribunal found that the allegations were completely unfounded and, in respect of one of the allegations, it reported at page 18 of the report:

We are satisfied that it is wholly untrue, that it is entirely without foundation and that it was made with a degree of recklessness amounting to complete irresponsibility.

There was no such finding along these lines by the tribunal in this case but, from then on, since the Locke Tribunal had reported, the then Fianna Fail Government did not pursue the matter further. They were satisfied once the facts had been established and once the reputations of the members of the Government and of the Oireachtas against whom the allegations were made were cleared. They left it at that. There was no witch hunt. But this Coalition were not content to leave it at that even after the tribunal had reported. Instead, as the Taoiseach has indicated, they brought the matter before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges pursuant to a Resolution proposed by the Taoiseach in Dáil Éireann on 26th November of last year. The matter was discussed by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on 4th December on the basis of a draft report from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach. Part of that report is to the following effect:

That the Committee on Procedure and Privileges——

having considered the report, et cetera, and here I resume the quotation

——report to Dáil Éireann that Deputies Robert Molloy and Brendan Crinion were in grave breach of privilege in making allegations against the Minister for Local Government, Deputy James Tully, in Dáil Éireann on 23rd June, and 2nd July, 1975.

To that draft report the Fianna Fáil members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges submitted a number of amendments. Each in turn was defeated by the assured Coalition majority until finally the following amendment was put:

To add the following paragraph:

However, in view of the withdrawal of the allegations of the two Deputies on the 4th July, 1975, the Committee recommend to the House that no further action be taken in this case.

Again, the Coalition majority defeated this, as I regard it, perfectly reasonable amendment. I submit that the matter might then have been permitted to rest by any decent minded Government. But no. The Coalition were determined to exact the last pound of political flesh they could get out of this operation, and so we come to this motion now before Dáil Éireann almost eight months after the withdrawal and apology by the two Deputies concerned. Apart from the vindictive intent behind the motion I believe that the motion is tabled to divert public attention from the serious economic difficulties this country now finds itself in and from the ineptitude of the Government in handling affairs of State.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. J. Lynch

I have my facts recorded and, in reference to a lapse of memory I had two years ago, I treat with the contempt it deserves the suggestion made by the Deputy.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Mr. J. Lynch

May I proceed now against these diversionary tactics, and that interruption was in itself a diversionary tactic. With the country in its present economic state, the worst experienced since the foundation of the State, the public are entitled to expect that Dáil time will be more profitably engaged than in debating this worthless and vindictive motion. We do not propose to pursue an acrimonious debate on the motion. We propose to show our disdain for the vindictive mentality behind it and for its diversionary purpose and for the waste of Dáil time that would be involved in debating it. For these reasons we will oppose the motion but, more particularly, as I said at the outset, because it is vindictive in its conception and its purpose, because it is mean and petty and totally unnecessary in the circumstances.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 63.

Tá

Barry, Peter.
Barry, Richard.
Begley, Michael.
Belton, Luke.
Belton, Paddy.
Bermingham, Joseph.
Bruton, John.
Burke, Dick.
Burke, Joan T.
Burke, Liam.
Byrne, Hugh.
Clinton, Mark A.
Cluskey, Frank.
Collins, Edward.
Conlan, John F.
Coogan, Fintan.
Cooney, Patrick M.
Corish, Brendan.
Cosgrave, Liam.
Costello, Declan.
Coughlan, Stephen.
Creed, Donal.
Crotty, Kieran.
Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
Desmond, Barry.
Desmond, Eileen.
Dockrell, Henry P.
Dockrell, Maurice.
Donegan, Patrick S.
Donnellan, John.
Enright, Thomas.
Esmonde, John G.
Finn, Martin.
FitzGerald, Garret.
Fitzpatrick, Tom (Cavan).
Flanagan, Oliver J.
Gilhawley, Eugene.
Governey, Desmond.
Griffin, Brendan.
Harte, Patrick D.
Hegarty, Patrick.
Hogan O'Higgins, Brigid.
Jones, Denis F.
Kelly, John.
Kenny, Enda.
Kyne, Thomas A.
L'Estrange, Gerald.
Lynch, Gerard.
McDonald, Charles B.
McLaughlin, Joseph.
McMahon, Larry.
Malone, Patrick.
Murphy, Michael P.
O'Brien, Fergus.
O'Connell, John.
O'Donnell, Tom.
O'Leary, Michael.
O'Sullivan, John L.
Pattison, Seamus.
Reynolds, Patrick J.
Ryan, John J.
Ryan, Richie.
Staunton, Myles.
Taylor, Frank.
Thornley, David.
Timmins, Godfrey.
Toal, Brendan.
Tully, James.
White, James.

Níl

Allen, Lorcan.
Andrews, David.
Barrett, Sylvester.
Brady, Philip A.
Brennan, Joseph.
Briscoe, Ben.
Browne, Seán.
Brugha, Ruairí.
Burke, Raphael P.
Callanan, John.
Dowling, Joe.
Fahey, Jackie.
Farrell, Joseph.
Faulkner, Pádraig.
Fitzgerald, Gene.
Fitzpatrick, Tom (Dublin Central).
Flanagan, Seán.
French, Seán.
Gallagher, Denis.
Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
Gibbons, Hugh.
Gibbons, James.
Gogan, Richard P.
Haughey, Charles.
Healy, Augustine A.
Herbert, Michael.
Hussey, Thomas.
Kenneally, William.
Kitt, Michael P.
Lalor, Patrick J.
Leonard, James.
Loughnane, William.
Calleary, Seán.
Carter, Frank.
Collins, Gerard.
Connolly, Gerard.
Crinion, Brendan.
Cronin, Jerry.
Crowley, Flor.
Cunningham, Liam.
Daly, Brendan.
Davern, Noel.
Lynch, Celia.
Lynch, Jack.
McEllistrim, Thomas.
MacSharry, Ray.
Meaney, Tom.
Molloy, Robert.
Moore, Seán.
Murphy, Ciarán.
Nolan, Thomas.
Noonan, Michael.
O'Connor, Timothy.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
O'Leary, John.
O'Malley, Desmond.
Power, Patrick.
Smith, Patrick.
Timmons, Eugene.
Tunney, Jim.
Walsh, Seán.
Wilson, John P.
Wyse, Pearse.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kelly and B. Desmond; Níl, Deputies Lalor and Healy.

Motion declared carried.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 25 Feb 1976