Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 18 Dec 1981

Vol. 331 No. 13

Order of Business.

The Taoiseach

It is proposed to take Item No. 7. As the House is aware, the Dáil will resume after the Christmas Recess on Tuesday, 26 January 1982 at 2.30 p.m.

In regard to the Adjournment Debate today the time allocations which were specified in the resolution passed by the Dáil last Tuesday are as follows: speech by the member of the Government opening the debate and the speech of the first Fianna Fáil speaker shall not exceed 45 minutes each; the speech of each other Member called on, other than the final two speakers, shall not exceed 30 minutes. The final speaker for Fianna Fáil shall be called not later than 2.30 p.m. and the Member of the Government shall be called on not later than 3 p.m. to conclude the debate not later than 4 p.m. Under these arrangements I understand the Government will have three half-hour slots and the Opposition two. The Whips have agreed therefore that the slot between 2 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. should be divided into two periods of 15 minutes each to be allocated to Government and Opposition speakers.

An Ceann Comhairle

Are the amended arrangements agreed?

Mr. Haughey

Agreed. May I raise two points on the Order of Business? First, it must be obvious to the Ceann Comhairle and every Member of this House that the times allocated today for this debate are hopelessly inadequate. Once again I want to protest about the arrogant treatment of this House by the Government in regard to this Adjournment Debate and their breach of faith with us, as the Opposition Party, and their breach of faith with the best traditions of this House.

Second, in view of the gravity of the incident which involved the disclosure to a journalist of one of the most confidential types of Government papers, namely, a Cabinet budgetary document, and the general dissatisfaction among the media and the general public with the explanation he gave yesterday, will the Taoiseach today at some stage make a full statement to the House on this issue? In particular will he confirm, as is now widely believed in the corridors of this House, that (a) it was an authentic budgetary Cabinet document, (b) it was disclosed not by a member of the established permanent civil service but by one of the many newly-recruited political appointees of this Government, and (c) that it was not given to the Government Information Service for distribution in the normal way, even inadvertently, but was disclosed by this newly-recruited political appointee to one particular journalist on one newspaper.

The Taoiseach

I made a full and candid statement yesterday on this issue immediately I established the facts when the question was raised in the House. I made the position adequately clear. The process of distribution was not handled properly. The document was, as I said yesterday, distributed in a manner which led to it being handed to a secretarial assistant dealing with press matters who assumed it had been published and that being the case, that it was available to be given to any journalist who might require it. That was a grave misunderstanding, but the real problem arose from distribution. The document should not have been distributed in this way and handed to someone who should never have had access to it. I apologise to the House and express my deep concern that this should have happened. I told the House I intend to instruct a review of procedures to make sure budgetary documents are not distributed in this way in future. I do not have anything to add to that.

Mr. Haughey

I must protest again, in the interests of the Members of this House and in the interests of truth, that the Taoiseach is not being honest with us. In particular, the questions that are unanswered are, first, if the document was given to the GIS, as he states, for circulation, why did not all the newspapers get it? Why did only one journalist have access to it? Secondly, will the Taoiseach confirm that the person who disclosed the document was not a member of his Department but was one of the recently recruited political appointees of a Government Minister? In the interest of good government, good procedures and honesty in public affairs, will the Taoiseach come clean with the House and make a full statement on this whole matter?

The Taoiseach

I have done so, but the Deputy's unwillingness to listen has mislead him. I did not say that the document was handed to the GIS. It was not handed to them. It was handed in error to a secretarial assistant to a Minister, someone who was not the private secretary but who was concerned with press affairs and who understood that the document had been published and could be distributed to any journalist. That was a grave misunderstanding, but the real gravity lies in the manner of the distribution of the document. I will ensure that that will not happen again.

Mr. Haughey

I must tell the Taoiseach that we have a very shrewd suspicion as to the name and the position of the individual concerned. Is the Taoiseach prepared to confirm that this secretarial assistant was not a member of his Department but was a temporary appointee and deliberately made this document available to one journalist? Will the Taoiseach answer those simple questions so that everybody will know exactly where he stands?

The Taoiseach

I have already answered the questions. The document was distributed in error to this secretarial assistant who was concerned with press affairs and he, thinking it had been published, handed it to a journalist.

Mr. Haughey

That is the point. It was handed to a journalist but was not circulated through the GIS.

The Taoiseach

I have stated that on several occasions but the Deputy would not listen.

Mr. Haughey

Would the Taoiseach confirm one final matter? It emerges now that this secretarial assistant was not a member of the staff of the GIS. Will the Taoiseach confirm that this person was one of those recently-recruited by a Minister as a personal assistant?

The Taoiseach

He is a temporary civil servant.

Mr. Lenihan

Will the Taoiseach answer "yes" or "no"?

Mr. Haughey

Was this person who, incidentally, is known to us, not a political appointee?

The Taoiseach

He was appointed as a secretarial assistant for press purposes.

Mr. Lenihan

The Taoiseach should be honest with us.

Mr. Haughey

Will the Taoiseach recognise now the very serious danger to the best traditions of our public service of recruiting masses of these outside political appointees to the public service?

Deputies

Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach

The matter arose by reason of the best traditions of the public service not being maintained so far as the distribution of this document was concerned. That is what I must take personal responsibility for and I will ensure that it will not happen again.

Mr. Lenihan

Having regard to the fact that we are adjourning this afternoon for the Christmas Recess and in view of the serious nature of the situation in Poland and of the vagueness of the information emanating from that unfortunate country, would the Taoiseach give consideration to making a statement before we adjourn that would be based on the up-to-date information that is available to the Government on this matter?

The Taoiseach

I will consider that proposal and may incorporate some remarks in that regard in my speech. However, the Deputy will understand that there is no hard information available either to this or to any other Government on the situation in Poland. In those circumstances there is very little that can be said about the tragic situation in that country.

Mr. Sherlock

I should like to point out that I was not elected by the people of my constituency merely for the purpose of adding a pair of feet to the voting lobby. Voting time here is the only time on which one gets any attention either from the Government or from the Opposition. It appears that, in arranging the speaking times for this Adjournment Debate, both the Government and Opposition could have allowed time for someone like myself between, say, 2 p.m. and 2.30 p.m.

The Taoiseach

I appreciate the Deputy's difficulty and I am sure the same goes for the Opposition.

We are prepared to give part of our time, say, between 2 p.m. and 2.30 p.m. to enable an Independent to speak. Perhaps the Opposition would be prepared to do the same. Are the Opposition agreeable to that?

Mr. Haughey

The times have been fixed by agreement.

The Taoiseach

I am anxious to know if the Opposition would be prepared to give some of their time to the Independents?

Mr. Haughey

If the Taoiseach wishes to discharge his political debt to the Independent Members by giving them some of his time, he is perfectly entitled to do so. We should be glad that he would do so.

Mr. Sherlock

I would remind the House that I am here as a party representative and not as an Independent and that nobody owes me any debt.

The Taoiseach

The Opposition are indebted to some of the Independents but do not appear willing to pay any of those debts.

Mr. Gene Fitzgerald

Would the Taoiseach like me to repeat the conversation I heard in the corridor?

Minister for Justice (Mr. J. Mitchell)

We have to make provision for the debts incurred by the Opposition while in Government.

Mr. Leyden

I am wondering whether either the Minister for Energy or his Minister of State would find time before we adjourn this evening to make a statement in relation to the serious situation that has developed regarding the freezing of diesel oil which has left thousands of householders and thousands of farmers in a grave situation? Apparently, the Minister is not doing anything about the matter. The people have been conned by the multi-national oil companies who were not prepared to include in the oil the necessary additative to prevent it freezing.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is a matter that the Deputy might raise during the debate.

Mr. Leyden

I may not have the opportunity of doing that.

Minister of State at the Department of Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Harte)

He wants a slot on Dallas.

Mr. Leyden

I am asking the Minister for Energy to make a statement on the matter during the day or, alternatively, on the adjournment of the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have told the Deputy that he may raise the matter during the debate today.

Mr. Wilson

I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of expenditure on primary school building and extensions.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is no provision for a debate on the Adjournment today.

Mr. Wilson

We are talking about a national issue. I sought yesterday to have time available to debate the issue but you saw fit to give the opportunity to another Deputy. The problem I am trying to raise is a serious national problem. The expenditure in this area by Fianna Fáil was £30 million while up to 30 November the amount promised by this Government has been only £17 million.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is no provision for any matter to be raised on the Adjournment today. I assure the Deputy that the only reason he was not facilitated yesterday regarding an adjournment debate was that there was a queue of Deputies wishing to raise matters.

Mr. Leyden

On a point of order I, too, was hoping to raise the matter of freezing oil on the Adjournment but now you say that there is no such opportunity available today. As we approach Christmas the situation in this regard is very serious.

An Ceann Comhairle

We must move on to the motion.