Nomination of Member of Government: Motion.

The Taoiseach

Tairgim:

Go gcomhaontóidh Dáil Éireann leis an Taoiseach d'ainmniú an Teachta Breandán Ó Dálaigh, Aire Stáit ag Roinn an Taoisigh agus Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Airgeadais, chun a cheaptha ag an Uachtarán mar chomhalta den Rialtas.

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approve the nomination by the Taoiseach of Deputy Brendan Daly, Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach and Minister of State at the Department of Finance, for appointment by the President to be a member of the Government.

Before dealing with the substance of this motion, I should like to say some words on the unfounded rumours about an alleged reluctance of Deputy Flynn to move from his present posting as Minister for the Environment.

Mr. Dukes

He shall not be moved.

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach

The simple truth is that Deputy Padraig Flynn could not have refused to move because I never asked him to do so. I have known the Minister for many years now, both personally and in Government, and can say unequivocally that these rumours do him a grave injustice. Those who are, like me, familiar with him will know that he is a dedicated, loyal colleague in Government and would unhesitatingly place himself at the disposal of the Taoiseach in anything he might be asked to do.

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I can understand that Deputies opposite would not understand that kind of honourable behaviour. Let me add that, under the Constitution, I would be the person who would have to make any particular proposal for the removal or reassignment of a Minister. Therefore, not unnaturally, I would be expected to know if any such proposal of that type existed. No such proposal exists or has existed.

I wish to state equally categorically that I have complete confidence in Deputy Bertie Ahern as the best Minister for Labour I have known. There has been no question of his seeking a change of appointment nor has any such proposal been considered by me.

Mr. Rabbitte

Too good to promote.

The Taoiseach

I should now like to deal with the specifics of the motion before the House and associated proposals. Subject to the motion being approved, I intend to terminate the assignment to myself of the Department of Defence and to assign that Department to Deputy Brendan Daly. I am sure Deputy Spring, in particular, will be very glad to know that I no longer have to carry all these burdensome portfolios.

Mr. Spring

I am very relieved for the Taoiseach on a personal basis at his age.

The Taoiseach

I am sure he would admit that I carried them with distinction for the short time involved.

Mr. Spring

I would not put that one to the House.

The Taoiseach

Of course Deputy Daly will cease to be Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach and at the Department of Finance on his appointment as a member of the Government.

Accordingly, I intend to recommend to Government that Deputy Vincent Brady be appointed as Minister of State at the Department of Finance in addition to his posts at the Departments of the Taoiseach and Defence. He will have special responsibility for Heritage Affairs at the Department of the Taoiseach as Deputy Daly did, in addition to his responsibility as Government Chief Whip.

It is the Government's intention to continue and to greatly expand their major programme of law reform in accordance with the needs of a changing Irish society especially in the social and family law areas. In order to assist the Minister for Justice, Deputy Ray Burke, in this area and in the general work of the Department I propose to recommend to Government to appoint Deputy Noel Treacy, at present Minister of State at the Department of Health, as Minister of State at the Department of Justice.

With the same objective in mind, I also intend to recommend to Government that the Department of Communications, which is at present grouped with Justice under the Minister Deputy Ray Burke be merged with the Department of Tourism and transport, where I see the further major development which is required in our communications network and its rapidly advancing technology as being more directly related to the transport and tourist areas. The new Department will be retitled the Department of Tourism, Transport and Communications.

In order to fill the vacancy in the Department of Health resulting from Deputy Treacy's move to Justice, I will propose that Deputy Chris Flood be appointed as Minister of State at the Department of Health. I am sure the House would like to join with me in wishing him well in the discharge of his new responsibilities.

Mr. Rabbitte

Tallaght Hospital is safe now.

Mr. J. Bruton

I noted the warmth of the applause which I would say was somewhat tepid.

I suppose it is appropriate to recall the circumstances in which this vacancy was created and which has lain unfilled for three months. I think it is the longest period in the history of the State during which we have not had a full-time Minister for Defence. It happened to have been a time in which defence could not have been or be more relevant to our concerns as a nation. Yet, the position of Minister for Defence has lain unfilled for three long months. Issues that needed immediate attention in the Defence Forces — particularly those arising from the important report of the Gleeson Commission — have remained not dealt with because of the Taoiseach's inability to take a decision as to who should fill the position of Minister for Defence. The inability to take that decision can be traced back precisely to the circumstances in which the vacancy itself arose. There is an inextricable link between the Taoiseach's inability to make up his mind about who should be Minister for Defence and the circumstances in which the vacancy in that office arose. The circumstances in which that office became vacant, as the House well knows, were the dismissal of Deputy Brian Lenihan from that position by the Taoiseach.

As we all know, Deputy Brian Lenihan is the man who over many years stood in the gap, the gap of danger sometimes, on behalf of the Taoiseach. Whenever the Taoiseach, whether in his present capacity or simply in his capacity as leader of Fianna Fáil, got into trouble, the man to whom he turned for help, to go on radio, to go on TV and explain the inexplicable, was Deputy Brian Lenihan. This is not the time to argue this, but when Deputy Lenihan got into some difficulty, and there is no doubt that he was in very considerable difficulty, he found that the relationship was not mutual, that it was a one way track. Loyalty flowed in one direction but not in the other.

I recollect very well an occasion in 1973, one of the most memorable moments in my political life, when the first Coalition Government for 16 years were elected, and the President of Ireland, Mr. Eamon de Valera, invited all the members of the new Cabinet and some of the junior Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries, to a meal. This is something which has been noted publicly. The President spoke about the Coalition Government, and he was known to have views about coalition Governments, and the point he made, which was a very valid one, was that if we had a Coalition Government or a Government with different strands of opinion, there must above all be mutual loyalty.

The bonds, the lines of loyalty within the Government who sit before me now have been irreparably broken by recent events. I accept that this is not a concern of mine in a sense; the Fianna Fáil Party are not my party, and I am not particularly concerned about their welfare one way or the other. In a sense they are a private organisation and their internal feuds are their own affair, if they are in Opposition, but this party are not in Opposition, they are in Government and their inability to look themselves straight in the face because of those events is having a corrosive effect on the conduct of public business at this time. Decisions cannot be taken because Ministers are literally afraid of one another. There was not any greater evidence of this fear, fear of ones colleagues, than the inability of the Taoiseach to make up his mind, to confront his colleagues and say, "I have decided that Deputy X should be Minister for Defence".

This internal paralysis in the Government has lead to four precise adverse consequences. It has lead to the most unadventurous and indecisive budget in the history of the State in which tax reform has been completely abandoned. It has lead to the delay of three months to which I referred, in the filling of this vacancy. It has lead to the unseemly and damaging spectacle of Ministers briefing the press vigorously against one another attempting to impugn colleague's motives in regard to alleged refusals to accept particular decisions in Cabinet from the Taoiseach. It has lead to a situation in which it can be said of Fianna Fáil that they are a party very much like the Ancien Regime of Louis XVI. Very little is it the case of careers open to talent. Very much is it the case that one must stay in one's particular estate for the rest of one's life. Once one is born to be a backbencher one must remain one in Fianna Fáil. Once one happens to become a Minister, one will remain one indefinitely in Fianna Fáil under the Taoiseach. Fianna Fáil cannot in any way be described as a career open to talent. Backbenchers in Fianna Fáil will not feel any incentive to shine because quite clearly all those who now sit around the table have an irrevocable lease on the position they hold, because the Taoiseach is afraid to remove them.

I listened to and read the Taoiseach's remarks with regard to what he described as the unfounded rumours about an alleged reluctance in Deputy Flynn to move from his present posting as Minister for the Environment. I am reminded with regard to those remarks by the Taoiseach, of the assessment by Mandy Rice-Davies of statements by a Minister in the Government of Harold Macmillan, when she said "he would say that, wouldn't he?" Of course, the Taoiseach will deny these rumours. He has no interest in admitting that these rumours are true. Of course, he will say that Deputy Flynn made no such refusal. I am not really concerned about whether he did or did not refuse although if he refused that involves an actual and immediate flouting of the authority of the Taoiseach. Even if Deputy Flynn did not refuse, even if he was prepared to accept or if he was never asked, the fact is that the rumours about Deputy Flynn's refusal emanated from the Cabinet table, from his own colleagues who were the people who briefed the press to the effect that Deputy Flynn was refusing to move. Why was that briefing done, whether or not it related to the truth? It was done because the bonds of loyalty that should bind a collectively responsible Government have, in the case of Fianna Fáil, been irrevocably broken. That is not simply a private matter. It is a public matter because of the consequences for the conduct of public business.

What the Government needed at present, if they are to continue, was a radical reshuffle. The Minister for Health is continuing in office apparently indefinitely and he cannot be moved because no one else will take the job even though he cannot do it. As far as the health services are concerned the Minister, and the Government, are incapable of making any structural reform of the services, despite the fact that they have the Hederman report setting out what should be done. They have set cash limits for the health boards which mean that those who bear the brunt of the health cuts are always the patients and never the administrators. The Minister says that the making of the cuts is not a matter for him but a matter for the chief executives of the health boards. In other words, he is abdicating responsibility for the health services as far as policy making is concerned and he simply sees himself as a post box for transmitting cash limits set by the Minister for Finance to health boards. We might as well not have a Minister for Health in so far as health policy making is concerned. Certainly, if that Minister is to continue in office he should have another post.

It appears that we also have to put up with having the Minister for Agriculture and Food continue to represent our most substantial industry in Brussels. Quite frankly, I was appalled to watch the Minister for Agriculture and Food on television the night before last, before the meeting of the Council of Agriculture Ministers to discuss the proposals by Commissioner MacSharry which would turn rural Ireland ultimately into an Indian reservation with people being paid money to do nothing. The proposals would involve a huge loss to the Irish economy and in PAYE jobs, those who depend for their living on either selling products to commercial agriculture or buying and processing the produce of commercial agriculture. Yet the Minister on television could not tell the Irish people whether he was for or against the proposals made by Commissioner MacSharry. He was, to use the words of the television interviewer, non-commital. A Minister for Agriculture and Food supposedly responsible for this industry who cannot make up his mind as to whether the MacSharry proposals are good or bad should not be a Minister for Agriculture and Food.

In a personal sense I welcome the elevation of Deputy Brendan Daly. He is undoubtedly a popular Deputy and well liked in this House, but it must not be forgotten that he is the Deputy who was responsible or was made responsible, I am not sure which, for the disastrous rod licence dispute, one of the most ill-advised political initiatives of the last decade. Yet he is now to be restored to office to the very sensitive position of Minister for Defence where so many difficult decisions have to be made.

I should like to refer also to other problems in the Government which have received quite an amount of press coverage. In my view the Progressive Democrats are contributing to this sense of paralysis in the Government. Their very presence prevents Fianna Fáil from doing any business, but they are not able to do any business themselves. They are using some well-tried public relations techniques in order to have the best of both worlds. Their leader went on television to say that the budget was a good budget but in case any of the few remaining Progressive Democrats supporters believed that it was a bad budget the chairman of the party came along to say it was a bad budget. Those who believe the budget was bad can find a Progressive Democrat to express their view and those who believe the budget was good can find a Progressive Democrat to express their view. The Progressive Democrats are either unable to make up their own mind or they themselves are suffering from some of the disease that quite clearly has afflicted the major partner in Government. They seem to have the same sense of mutual incomprehension in their own party that exists also in the major party in Government.

I believe this reshuffle — or perhaps "scuffle" would be a more appropriate word — which the House is being asked to approve indicates the existence of a chronic problem at the heart of the major party in Government, a chronic problem which will not go away and the only appropriate treatment for which is a sustained spell on this side of the House.

Mr. Spring

I am extremely grateful that the time for this debate has been extended from the original hour and a half offered by the Government to three hours, a request which was made by the Labour Party Whip.

In her biography of the Duke of Wellington, Elizabeth Longford describes the entry of Napoleon into Paris this way:

The Emperor was carried shoulder-high into the Tuileries on the 20th of March, 1815, with his eyes shut and a sleep-walker's smile on his face. The Hundred Days had begun.

The Hundred Days she referred to, of course, represented the period between Napoleon's triumphant return to Paris, after his escape from the island of Elba, and his ultimate defeat at the battle of Waterloo. It was a glorious and exciting hundred days, which in many ways encapsulated the brilliance and also the fatal flaws which characterised Napoleon.

Today we are coming to the end of another period of a hundred days, albeit a rather less glorious and exciting one. The hundred days we are celebrating today marks the period between Elba and Waterloo as well — but it was Deputy Brian Lenihan who was exiled to Elba a hundred days ago, and the Taoiseach who meets his Waterloo today, defeated as he is by the intransigence of one of his own Ministers, who refuses the transfer which in anybody's opinion he so richly deserves.

The Emperor, surrounded by his marshals and foot soldiers, is carried shoulder high in here today, his eyes firmly shut to the division his Government have created in our society, to present us with a sleep- walker's reshuffle, characterised only by his dithering and lack of decision.

In the last hundred days we have seen squalid scandals of mature recollection here at home. Internationally we have seen the world go to war. We have seen some of the largest armies and biggest collections of firepower ever assembled inflicting massive destruction. We have seen this Parliament participate in a charade over Ireland's position in relation to that war, and our Taoiseach has not been able to make up his mind about appointing a Minister for Defence.

Surely there could be no greater comment on the pomposity and self-importance of this Government that while they have flown around Europe, posturing about our position in the world and in the European Community, we have been unable even to appoint a solitary Minister for Defence. How or why we should be expected to be taken seriously, while this foolish agonising about a simple appointment was going on, defies any attempt at rationalisation.

Of course, the last hundred days have seen the emergence of a new dimension in internal Cabinet relations as well. Two high offices have been personified in one person and, as a result, whatever about other tensions in the Cabinet, at least we have been able to say that the relations between the Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence have been without any argument.

Thus, the Minister for Defence has been able to supply 150 soldiers to guard the Taoiseach's own palace. The Taoiseach has been able to silence any protest by the Minister for Defence at the relatively modest provision in the Estimates with which the Minister will be expected to meet the high expectations generated by his predecessor's promises to the members of the Defence Forces, promises made of course, while the predecessor was both Minister and a candidate for the office of Commander in Chief. Of course, between them, they have been able to make any arrangements necessary to ensure that anyone interested in peaceful protest will not be able to get within a mile of Shannon Airport.

It must have been very soothing for the holders of these high offices to find so much common ground between them. In fact, I began to suspect that the Taoiseach was giving consideration to holding on to Defence. Think of the toys to be played with — the tanks to be lined up in the new palace, the helicopters to land and take off from the roof. Think of all the times he would receive the crisp Army salute as he went about his rounds — quite a refreshing change that must make from the rather more abject and grovelling adoration he gets from his backbenchers, who are gradually departing.

Instead, he has decided to re-instal Deputy Daly as Minister for Defence. On behalf of the Labour Party I wish Deputy Daly well in his appointment. If I describe his appointment and the proceedings today as a damp squib, it is for those reasons and not a personal reflection on Deputy Daly. He is a decent Deputy who is well respected in this House and is popular. He was dropped from Cabinet only because he was made the scapegoat of a disastrous collective Cabinet decision in relation to the rod licence issue.

I would issue a word of warning to him, which I know he will take in the spirit in which it is intended. He faces high expectations as Minister. The provisions made in the Estimates under the headings of pay and allowances for the Defence Forces will not give him any room to manoeuvre. He will need the strong support of his Taoiseach and other members of the Government in the months ahead. I think he knows enough to know by now that the strong support of the Taoiseach is reserved for only one man, and that is the Taoiseach himself.

I described this appointment as a damp squib. The reshuffle which we all expected, and which this Government need if they are to change the more reactionary elements of their image, has become a total anti-climax, because one Minister has refused to be moved. We all know why — the Minister concerned is afraid that if he agrees to move it will prove that everything that "Scrap Saturday" says about him is true. It must be the first time in history that a satirical radio programme has turned into self-fulfilling prophecy.

Virtually every Minister who resigned from Mrs. Thatcher's Government in the dying days of her administration offered as his reason that he wanted to spend more time with his family. I do not question the Taoiseach's statement that he did not ask the Minister for the Environment to move and, therefore, was not refused. The point is that the Taoiseach's authority is totally diminished and he could not even ask for the move he wanted. In the case of the Minister for the Environment, it would perhaps be difficult for him to offer the reason offered by Ministers across the water. We have all found out in recent months that he is an acknowledged expert on the family and on parenthood. There is no need then for him to be changed from his present position. This expert on the family will continue for the time being to preside over the re-emergence of a housing crisis, the kind of crisis which places intolerable strains on families waiting for housing throughout the country. He will continue to preside over the decimation of local authorities and the essential services they provide. He will continue to do so because he decrees that he will, not because the Taoiseach, his party leader, wishes it.

Because the Flynnstone factor has prevailed in determining the nature and the scope of this reshuffle, the Minister for Health is also to remain at his post, presiding over a health service he is privately prepared to admit is in more serious difficulties than at any time since he came into office. His management of the health services has been an unmitigated disaster from the beginning. The most serious criticism I can offer of him is that, single handed he has removed any concept of a right to the provision of health care.

Three years ago we had a health service which was struggling with financial difficulties, but one in which access to care was determined by medical criteria. Now access to health care when it is needed is determined almost entirely by income. That is the fundamental change brought about by the policies of this Minister, and by his failure to fight for the rights of the people he was elected to serve. If anyone should see himself as the champion and advocate of the sick and the handicapped, it is the Minister for Health. This Minister has never done so, and he should have been offered a free transfer years ago.

The same is true of the Minister for Education, who has substituted bluster and sleight-of-hand for policy in the last three years. We have all seen the promises of reductions in the pupil teacher ratio in the last few weeks. What should not be forgotten is that even if those promises are kept, the pupil teacher ratio will still be greater than when this Minister came into office.

Mrs. O'Rourke

That is not true.

Mr. Spring

The effect that her promises will have on average class sizes — a measure of progress in education that is never mentioned nowadays — will be negligible.

The only other significant change announced by the Taoiseach is the removal from the Minister Deputy Burke of the communications portfolio — which has been sought by this House for a long time and its transfer to the Minister Deputy Brennan, the man who is making a bid at this stage to be the Pooh-Bah of this Government, the Minister for everything else.

Deputy Burke's principal job in communications, is done, of course. He has brow-beaten RTE into submission and starved them of the resources necessary to provide an effective public service that is never beholden to the establishment of the day. He has forced them to hand over Cablelink in the least advantageous way possible, and has, in the process, helped to fatten up Telecom for eventual privatisation. He is now free to concentrate on the files in the Department of Justice, and I must express the hope that they, at least, do not keep him awake at night.

The Minister Deputy Brennan, on the other hand, is now in charge of three areas of responsibility, in fact, everything else that is left in Government. He has now three major areas of responsibility and six semi-State bodies. We can now expect the Minister Deputy Brennan to become the chief privatiser of this Government. He has so far made no other impact on the life of the nation, except through his rather odd approach to supporting failed private enterprises by forcing successful semi-State companies to subsidise them. He can rest assured that his every move in his new Department will be carefully watched, to ensure that it is driven by commercial good sense rather than ideological whimsy which we have seen in the past.

All in all, the Government remain intact. This is the same Government who preside over the highest exodus of people from our country in any decade in the last five. This is the same Government who are presiding over a rapidly increasing rate of unemployment, and attempting to ignore the problem in the hope that it will go away. This is the same Government who are trying to hide away from the reality of a rapidly expanding set of social problems. This is the same Government who are trying to be all things to all men on the international front, and have ended up by failing to offer any position at all on behalf of Ireland. This is not a Government who need a reshuffle — they need a fundamental reappraisal of their very existence.

We have already indicated that it is our intention to vote against this appointment. I should say again that we are not voting against the appointment of Deputy Daly as Minister for Defence. We certainly wish him well both personally and politically because he is facing a very difficult assignment given the very tight budget that has been left to him by his predecessor. Our vote will be cast directly against the Taoiseach who appointed him; who has reduced the office of Minister for Defence to a joke in the last three months; who has failed in his first constitutional duty to be the head of Government; and who has run away from the imperative need to fundamentally change both the personnel and the policies that have divided our society so drastically since he became Taoiseach.

Proinsias De Rossa

I welcome the fact that the Taoiseach has at last — after more than three months — got around to appointing an additional member to the Cabinet to fill the Office of Minister for Defence, but I cannot offer a similar welcome for the appointment itself.

The decision of the Taoiseach to leave the Department of Defence without a full time Minister for more than three months is inexplicable and unforgiveable and has done enormous damage to morale both within the Department and within the Defence Forces. It has meant that this important Department has been without a full time Minister at a time when there is a major conflict going on in the Gulf and when Irish soldiers serving with UNIFIL face increased dangers. It left the Department of Defence without a full time Minister at a time when the reform process and the implementation of the Gleeson report had reached a crucial point. I understand, in fact, that the implementation of the Gleeson report has ground to a virtual halt and that it is going to be difficult to get the process off the ground again.

Whatever one might think about the manner in which he performed during the Presidential election and the circumstances of his dismissal by the Taoiseach, it would be churlish not to acknowledge that Deputy Brian Lenihan was one of the most competent and successful Ministers for Defence in recent times. He took office in 1989 at a point when morale in the Defence Forces was at an all time low, when there was seething discontent over pay and conditions, when Defence Forces personnel were still denied the right to join a representative body, and when there was a real danger of very serious conflict between the Department and the enlisted personnel.

Deputy Lenihan faced an enormous challenge in restoring morale and winning back the confidence of the personnel. Broadly speaking he was successful in doing so. He gave certain undertakings and he honoured them. The Defence (Amendment) Act, while by no means perfect, was an important advance. It allowed for the establishment of the representative bodies, which was probably the most important step forward in regard to the democratic rights of Defence Forces personnel since the establishment of the State. Pay and conditions have improved, slightly perhaps, but they have improved though much remains to be done. There was a serious effort made to implement the root and branch reforms advocated in the Gleeson report. I very much fear that this is now all in jeopardy.

Many of the problems within the Defence Forces have had their origins in the fact that more often than not defence was the preserve of second division Ministers. I do not wish to be personally offensive to Deputy Daly, but I know that his appointment will not inspire confidence among the Defence Forces. His only notable political legacy so far was the appallingly divisive rod-angling licence dispute, which did enormous damage to the tourist industry in certain areas and in regard to which the Government are still trying to pick up the pieces. I do not believe that Deputy Daly has the experience or the political clout to ensure that the Defence Forces get the attention they deserve at the Cabinet table.

It is very obvious also that the Taoiseach's plans for a more widespread reallocation of Cabinet positions has been successfully frustrated by a rebellion by one of his senior Cabinet Ministers. The Taoiseach's denial last week, and again today, that any such reshuffle had been contemplated was unconvincing and quite at variance with what his own Ministers and Deputies were saying openly around Leinster House last week. The cracks not just in the Coalition, but within Fianna Fáil itself, grow wider every day.

The Minister for the Environment, Deputy Flynn, has plainly defied the authority of the Taoiseach by refusing to move to another Department. Such a successful rebellion can only undermine the political credibility of the Taoiseach and further destabilise this Government.

Mr. Flynn

That is not true.

Proinsias De Rossa

If the Minister says in this House that it is not true, I accept his statement. Nevertheless it has to be repeated that there were Deputies from the Minister's party last week alleging that it was true.

Mr. Flynn

I know nothing about that. What the Deputy suggested previously is not true.

Proinsias De Rossa

This event must be compared with the refusal in 1986 of the then Labour Party Minister, Deputy Barry Desmond, to leave the Department of Health, a move which gravely damaged the political authority of Dr. Garret FitzGerald at that time and, indeed, in many respects marked the beginning of the end of the Fine Gael/Labour Coalition of those years. It must be said that if, as Deputy Flynn has stated, he did not refuse, nevertheless there are strong indications that the Taoiseach did want to reshuffle this Government.

The Taoiseach

That is not true either.

Proinsias De Rossa

Would the Taoiseach kindly explain then where these stories came from?

Mr. Flynn

I will tell you. Creative writing is still fashionable in this country.

Proinsias De Rossa

You cannot blame everything on "Scrap Saturday."

Acting Chairman (Mr. Wyse)

Please avoid interrupting; I do not think any Deputy should be inviting interruptions.

Proinsias De Rossa

I can assure you Chairman I am not inviting interruptions. I am making my contribution to this debate. I allowed the Deputies opposite to make their contributions in order to have on record what they believe to be the truth.

I want to make the point that we will be voting against this motion, not simply because we have no confidence in the appointment announced today by the Taoiseach, indeed not just the one appointment but all of the appointments, but because we have no confidence in the Government in general. The Workers' Party have a motion of no confidence in the Government on the Order Paper going back to October last and nothing we have seen since then would lead to a restoration of confidence in this Government. Indeed, with every day their shortcomings become more evident. We have just seen unemployment jump to its highest level in two years and yet the Government produced a budget which included not one single measure likely to create an additional job or stimulate any new employment.

Despite the promises contained in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress to provide a comprehensive equitable and efficient healthcare system, health services throughout the country face a major crisis unless the Government immediately provide additional funds for the health boards. The fact is that the health services have never recovered from the severe cutbacks imposed by the Fianna Fáil Government in 1987 and 1988 and still require significant additional funding even to allow services to be restored to the levels operating in the mid-eighties. The current shortfall facing several health boards will mean even longer waiting lists; the early discharge of patients; the longer closure of wards and beds during holiday periods; a worsening of the plight of the mentally handicapped and less money for child care services and facilities for the elderly. Their appalling record in the health area alone would be sufficient grounds for booting this Government out of office.

It is appropriate when discussing the appointment of a new Minister for Defence that we should refer to the appalling slaughter and the physical and ecological destruction in the Gulf War. There is an urgent need for a fresh debate in this House on that war, in view of the developments since it was launched by the United States and its allies, and their now declared intention of going beyond the mandate of Resolution 660 of the Security Council.

Last week at Question Time the Taoiseach finally admitted that he believed sanctions had not been given sufficient time to work. This is an astonishing admission by a Government who are actively assisting in the prosecution of this war by providing refuelling facilities at Shannon and overflight facilities for aircraft of those countries engaged in this war. The logic of this view, as I have argued repeatedly, is that this war is unnecessary and was avoidable. What is necessary is for Ireland to use every avenue open to it to actively seek a ceasefire and to insist on the United Nations regaining control of the situation. In pursuing such a course, we should logically refuse to provide refuelling or overflight facilities to the belligerents in this grab for control of Middle East oil. We should specifically take into account that Britain has allowed landing to B-52 bombers in Britain and, if we have not received it already, it is quite likely that requests will be made to us for overflight facilities through Irish air space. It should be borne in mind that B-52 bombers are used for indiscriminate carpet bombing and under no circumstances should we allow such aircraft to pass through our air space.

I want to comment also on the other changes announced by the Taoiseach. I welcome the decision of the Taoiseach to withdraw the Communications portfolio from the Minister, Deputy Burke. We have always held it was a mistake to combine the portfolios of Justice and Communications. Indeed, the demands of the Department of Justice are more than sufficient for any one Minister. However, it should be noted that we are not just seeing responsibility for the Department of Communications being given to a new Minister but what we are seeing is the virtual abolition of the Department of Communications and it is important that that be borne in mind. I am deeply concerned, however, at the decision to give responsibility for communication matters to Deputy Brennan, in view of his attitude to RTE, which will now be one of his main areas of responsibility. Deputies will no doubt recall the attempts of the Minister, Deputy Brennan, in September 1989 to bully and intimidate RTE because on a current affairs programme he was asked a legitimate question regarding financial contributions to his party, which he found embarrassing and was unwilling to answer. The fear must now be that the Minister, Deputy Brennan, having established his ability "to put the boot in" is being given RTE to sort out and to silence all critical comments or difficult questions for this Government.

I indicated at the beginning that my party will be voting against the motion to appoint the new Minister and I urge the House generally to do so also.

Mr. McCartan

The moving of this motion by the Taoiseach this evening is somewhat ironic and throws into relief the attitude shown by him at Question Time this afternoon when as the Minister for Defence he was answering the questions tabled to him on the arrangements to be put in place by the Department with regard to the promotion of senior officers in the future. The Taoiseach for some reason seemed to lose his temper and suggested that matters with regard to the running of the Defence Forces would not be taken on by any Member of this House and that it should be left to those within the Defence Forces and its leadership. He now, of necessity, brings before the House a motion to appoint a full-time Minister for Defence to those very same Defence Forces. We have the opportunity in this House to comment on that item as the Taoiseach must seek the permission and approval of this House for this appointment.

It is to be welcomed at least that the primacy of this House with regard to matters not only in regard to the Department of Defence but with regard to the appointment of any Government Minister is underwritten in the Constitution and that it is a function and responsibility of this House to be involved in the appointments to the highest office in any Department and in particular to the Department of Defence. These appointments must have the consent of the Members of this House. In some respects the moving of this motion is to be welcomed.

Secondly, it must also be noted that this has come much too late in the day. The Taoiseach has not yet explained in moving his motion why it took almost 100 days from the time he sacked ignominiously his long-time friend and colleague as he then described him, the former Minister for Defence, Deputy Brian Lenihan to find a replacement and to appoint in the way he has Deputy Daly to the position. First, it must be recognised that morale in any area of the State — but most importantly in the area of Defence and the courageous work that the members of the Defence Force do in defending democracy and the institutions of this State — is important and it is important that it is understood, respected and maintained. The Taoiseach has delivered a very serious blow to that morale by his failure to appoint a full-time Minister. Second, the very important momentum which had been established in the Defence Forces in the earlier months of 1990 was lost entirely over the past three months. The Gleeson report which was published in the middle of last year had been taken on board very quickly by the then Minister of Defence, Deputy Lenihan, who indicated at the early stages of the new term last October that many of the crucial and key decisions and recommendations of that report had been taken on board by him as Minister and would be implemented.

It is clear that the Taoiseach, because of all the responsibilities he had taken on board and intended to look after over the Christmas period, had not the opportunity to deal with them, or maintain the momentum that was there previously. Issues regarding the establishment of associations of the Defence Forces have been left unattended. Very important matters regarding the provision of resources, of offices, of staff and of means whereby they could establish an independent existence promised in this House by the former Tánaiste and Minister for Defence during the debate on the Defence (Amendment) Bill, 1990, have not been carried forward or implemented as we were led to believe they would be. The establishment of those associations independent of the chain of command, which would work with their own secretariat exterior to the Defence Forces structures, has not taken place and has led to massive resentment and frustration within the Defence Forces not only at the recruit NCO level but even among the higher rank associations who are now wondering whether this whole process is to be put in place or whether the matter is to be lost entirely.

It would be remiss of this House if it did not note the important contribution that Deputy Lenihan made during his term as Minister for Defence. It is fair to say that this Ministry — if one can draw parallels — is not considered to be a major portfolio of responsibility. It is clear that Deputy Lenihan, who was suffering from ill-health at the time and recovering in a remarkable way from a major operation, took on this Ministry as one that seemed to be within his capabilities. Having done so, the energy and innovation with which he introduced change and debate within the Defence Forces in the short few months he was in that Department was remarkable for the lack lustre history of that Department on the one hand and his own limitations — personal and otherwise — on the other.

The momentum was remarkable. The change and debate which was introduced was historic in many respects. While his departure was a matter for the Taoiseach — the way it happened was a matter for him and his own survival — we on this side of the House regret that what was started was not passed on quickly to a successor. Much of that momentum has been lost and morale in the Defence Forces has been dealt a very serious and sad blow. I hope the new Minister in that Department, Deputy Daly, can pick up the pieces if they are there to be taken up. To the extent that he may have the job shortly, depending on the views of the House, I wish him well in his work. I cannot do otherwise. Deputy De Rossa has indicated some of our reservations given his previous performance as Minister for the Marine and the unfortunate debacle of the rod licence. Our hope is that lessons were learned then and that mistakes of hasty, ill-considered decisions will not be repeated because there is so much important and vital work to be done in Defence over the coming months.

The Gleeson report has, it seems, been forgotten. Certainly any view abroad that pay and conditions for the Defence Forces have improved remarkably, despite its publication, leaves much to be understood as to what has to be done in that Department. Deputy Daly will have shortly a very serious duty to ensure that the recommendations of the committees and of the Gleeson report will be implemented without any demur on his part or on the part of the Government.

The second issue of importance that arises as a consequence of the Government's motion is the Taoiseach's attempt to address the haphazard and poor performance of the Minister for Justice and Communications. Two things have happened today. First, the portfolio of Communications has at last been taken from the Minister Deputy Burke and passed on to the Minister Deputy Brennan. Second, a Minister of State has been appointed to the Department of Justice. Both of these demands were made by myself, as spokesperson on Justice, and by others on this side of the House over the last number of years, in fact, almost from the day Deputy Burke was appointed to both portfolios. No reasoned explanation was given then and no justification has been given since.

The appointment of Deputy Séamus Brennan to the portfolio of Communications is a matter of concern. Deputy Burke developed the name of "Rambo" in the way he dealt with the Broadcasting Bill. He developed a macho image of a man who would brook no criticism, no interference and would listen to no views whatever once he had set about the task of tackling RTE and dealing with them in the way that Fianna Fáil had so long promised. I cannot say that the physique of Deputy Séamus Brennan would suggest that at the end of his term he may end up being called "Rambo" in the same way as Deputy Burke. However, there is no doubt that the same vengeance and vendetta exists in the personage of Deputy Séamus Brennan towards RTE as a public broadcasting authority.

No one can forget, as Deputy De Rossa and others here said, the manner in which he pursued with a vengeance, single handedly, a reporter who did no more than put to him a searing searching question he was unable to handle at the time and how he then demanded and sought an apology. The message was delivered by more senior members of the Cabinet, but nonetheless the man who could have called a halt to that ignominious process was Deputy Séamus Brennan. The way the reporter was forced to issue a letter of apology to the Minister bodes ill in regard to the notion that Deputy Séamus Brennan might have about the independence of reporters in their functions and duties and about a Minister not using his office to set a score aright when he or she has been found wanting.

Acting Chairman

I should inform the Deputy that he has exactly two minutes.

Mr. McCartan

I welcome the fact that a Minister of State has been appointed to the Department of Justice. Deputy Treacy, who has been appointed, has shown in his handling of the Child Care Bill that he has an aptitude to deal with complex legislation, that he has some notion of the rights of children, an important area in which Deputy Burke has shown little interest. He has failed to provide the institution of detention he promised for young female offenders; he has failed to introduce any mark of responsibility in regard to child rights generally in his Department. Children of seven years are still to be considered criminals within our code and he has failed to look at that issue.

Finally, I welcome the appointment of Deputy Chris Flood to the position of Minister of State. I wish him well in his work. I hope his appointment will ensure that the building of the regional hospital at Tallaght will proceed, that Beaumont Hospital in my own constituency will be brought to full potential and that the closed wards will soon be opened. The Taoiseach, in whose constituency it is located, appears unable to do so. I hope the services in the Dublin area generally will improve by the appointment of a Minister of State from the Dublin region and, in particular, services for the mentally handicapped. I hope that is not just a pious aspiration on my part.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy's time has expired.

Mr. McCartan

The appointments made here this evening are disappointing in the extreme. I will welcome the opportunity to vote against the Government and mark our opposition to a Government who do not have our confidence and did not do anything tonight to instil any further confidence.

Acting Chairman

I call Deputy Taylor-Quinn. I should inform the Deputy that she has 15 minutes only.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

First, I should like to congratulate my colleague and neighbour, Deputy Brendan Daly, on his nomination as Minister for Defence. It is opportune that he should be appointed Minister for Defence and I am glad the Taoiseach has seen fit to reappoint him to the Cabinet. If I were to criticise the Taoiseach it would be for removing Deputy Brendan Daly from the Cabinet in 1989 because of the debacle of the rod licence and a coalition arrangement with the Progressive Democrats. It was unacceptable to many of us that County Clare should have been victimised in that way and I am glad Deputy Daly has been nominated for reappointment to the Cabinet.

Obviously, the Taoiseach has been operating in a paralytic state for the past three months. Today we have been given a slight indication that that paralysis is leaving his left hand when he lifted one finger and nominated Deputy Brendan Daly as Minister for Defence. However, he found it very difficult to get any further movement into his arm and shake up the Cabinet. Contrary to all our expectations and the hype over the past six months and longer about a major Cabinet reshuffle, we have witnessed today only the minimum of Cabinet reshuffles. One has to question why there has been such a minimal Cabinet reshuffle.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. Calleary)

It is because the rest of us are so good.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

I would point out to the Minister of State that it is because the Taoiseach is afraid for his political life and of what might hit him in the back from within his own party. That is the bottom line on what has happened in this House today, and the Minister of State is well aware of that.

The Taoiseach has nominated the appointment of only one new Minister. There has been no reshuffle as such, only the transfer of responsibility for Communications from the Minister Deputy Burke to the Minister Deputy Brennan, new responsibilities being given to two junior Ministers and the appointment of a new Minister of State. In effect, what has happened today is a nonevent for the Government and is an indication of the Taoiseach's lack of courage to introduce change. It is a pity that the Taoiseach who in the past was regarded as a fearless man can now be seen to be a fearful man. We have witnessed evidence of this in the House today in his Cabinet reshuffle.

I should like to congratulate Deputy Flood on his nomination as Minister of State at the Department of Health. I understand Deputy Flood is a very active member of Dublin County Council. There has been a particular problem in Dublin in regard to the housing of itinerants and the opposition of the settled community to this proposal. I hope Deputy Flood will use his new office to help resolve the problems in regard to the travelling community in Dublin.

It would be remiss of me if I did not refer in this debate to the previous Minister for Defence, Deputy Brian Lenihan. Since I became spokesperson on Defence for Fine Gael some weeks ago I have been made aware of the high esteem in which Deputy Lenihan was held as Minister for Defence by members of the Defence Forces. He did a lot of good work during his short term as Minister for Defence and took action in many areas where there had been no action previously. It is unfortunate that a man with his record in public life is no longer a Government Minister. The story of his dismissal will go down in political history and in the history of Fianna Fáil. It is not a very pleasant story and I do not wish to go over the events which led to his dismissal.

The Minister for Defence will have a particular problem to deal with in the current political climate. There has been a war in the Gulf for the past two and a half weeks. Yet, the Taoiseach did not see fit to appoint a Minister for Defence before now. I hope this is not indicative of his attitude to defence matters. As one of two Members of this House who was an officer in the FCA, I hope he will indicate to the new Minister for Defence the special importance which must be given to the position of the FCA. The FCA has been allowed to deteriorate over the years. The accommodation provided for members of the FCA is appalling. Some of the offices occupied by FCA personnel at present would have to be seen to be believed. The floors in many of these offices are full of holes and the roofs are falling in. In addition, the training given to FCA personnel is almost nil. The maximum which can be given is one week a year. The conditions in which FCA personnel have to live, the quality of their clothing and the food they have to eat are appalling. I appeal to the Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence to pay particular attention to this issue. They should keep in mind that while they are not recruiting people into the FCA, subversive organisations such as the IRA are readily recruiting young people.

Some people tend to laugh at the FCA and regard it as a source of amusement. It is extremely unfortunate that this is so. At one stage people were honoured to serve their country. A sense of service and commitment to one's country was something to be proud of and not something to be sneered or sniggered at. However, I believe that because of the attitude of this Government and previous Governments to this issue people's attitudes changed. There will be an onus on the new Minister for Defence to instil a sense of pride in young people by encouraging them to get involved in the FCA. Not alone should young men be recruited into the FCA but so should young women. There should be open recruitment for all young people.

We take the Army and the FCA for granted because we do not believe they have very much to do. We regard them as an insurance policy which has to be there and it is not until they are called on to deal with a certain problem that we recognise their importance. Prior to 1969 people's attitude to the Army left much to be desired. However, the importance of the Army was recognised in 1969 when it became evident that there was need for Army personnel to be located along the Border. People began to view the Army in a new light after that. They also began to view the FCA in a new light when they had to become involved in Army activities due to the transfer of Army personnel to the Border. Indeed, in some instances the FCA were involved in Army activities along the Border and in other areas around the country.

This issue must be given serious consideration. The Government must make a proper financial commitment to the development of the Army so that they will have proper facilities and working conditions and receive adequate pay. The pay and working conditions of the Army deteriorated during the period 1973 to 1988. An Army commandant who was three points ahead of a Garda superintendent in 1973 was 28 points behind a Garda superintendent by 1988-89. This anomaly must be corrected immediately.

Over the years the Army have done us proud as a serving member of the United Nations peace-keeping force in the Congo, Lebanon, Israel, the Gaza Strip and at present in south Lebanon and in the Iran-Iraq area where some of the personnel are involved in a supervisory capacity. One senior Irish Army official, Bill O'Callaghan, did Ireland proud in his role with the United Nations three or four years ago. It is important that we are aware of the commitment of the Army personnel to peace-keeping, both nationally and internationally. At present our troops in the Lebanon must be commended on the way they are carrying out their duties in difficult circumstances and their families deserve greater support from the Department of Defence. The new Minister has an opportunity to arrange better communication between the troops serving abroad and their families at home in present circumstances. I would ask him to have that matter investigated as soon as possible.

I am pleased Deputy Daly has been nominated again to the Cabinet. He will have a lot of responsibility as Minister for Defence. It is a sensitive area and one that demands a lot of skill and attention. I would ask him to pay particular attention to the Army jumping team which has brought us international renown. They have done tremendous work promoting the horse industry in Ireland, and they can be used to further promote that industry particularly at a time when the horse population is declining. I would ask the Minister to view the matter in that light.

I wish the Minister every good luck. I hope that when his term as Minister for Defence ends it will not be in the same circumstances as when he was Minister for the Marine. I hope the Taoiseach will view this matter in a more positive light than the situation that existed in 1989. There are difficulties in the Defence Forces which need urgent attention, particularly in relation to pay and conditions, and I would ask the Minister to immediately address those matters. I would ask the Taoiseach to ensure that the Department of Defence within the overall Cabinet structure, are not treated as a Cinderella Department but that he will give them priority at the Cabinet table from the point of view of making positive financial commitments. There should be a very clear line where our Army and the reserve forces will stand in the future.

Mr. Ryan

I would take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister, Deputy Brendan Daly, on his nomination by the Taoiseach. In the likely event of his nomination being approved by this House later this evening I assure him that I will be a vigorous and constructive opponent as Labour spokesman on Defence in the interests of the personnel of the Defence Forces. I also congratulate Deputy Chris Flood on his nomination as Minister of State at the Department of Health. I have worked with him for a considerable period on Dublin County Council. He is a very active and committed public representative.

Last week the Labour Party raised the whole issue of the Government commitment to the future construction of the Tallaght Regional Hospital. As other speakers have said this afternoon, hopefully that commitment will be met and I hope the new Minister of State will use his position to ensure that the project goes ahead.

As one who has had dealings with the previous Tánaiste and Minister for Defence, Deputy Brian Lenihan, I would like to thank him for his commitment to the establishment of the representative association for the Defence Forces, a commitment which is acknowledged by the personnel of the Defence Forces. In November when Deputy Lenihan last answered questions as Minister for Defence he gave certain commitments, and I will be ensuring that the new Minister will meet those commitments.

The non-appointment of a full-time Minister for Defence since October last has been a tragedy for the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces personnel. That was a very important period during which the Department's Estimates were prepared, published and passed. The absence of a full-time Minister is very evident in those Estimates and, indeed, in the budget brought before us last week.

In July 1990 the report of the Gleeson Commission, the first independent commission to examine the conditions of service and rates of pay in the Defence Forces, was published. There were 170 recommendations in that report which was generally welcomed. There were great hopes that these recommendations would be accepted by the Government and implemented in full. This would require a commitment by Government to provide money for that purpose. I know that all the recommendations could not be implemented in the one year, but I regret very much that, with the exception of salary increases none of the recommendations has been implemented, and it is very evident from the Book of Estimates and from the budget that there will be no real movement during 1991 towards implementing them. My great fear is that this report will be assigned to a shelf in the Department, like many a report before it. If that happens it will be a disgrace and it is something that we, as representatives should not allow to happen.

The commission visited various barracks throughout the length and breadth of the country. They noted, for example, that the quality of sleeping accommodation was extremely poor in certain areas. Members of the Defence Forces are often out protecting the State, perhaps for 24 hours at a time, when we are in our beds and they have totally inadequate living conditions. Is it not a scandal that members of the Defence Forces are sleeping in such draughty conditions? I note in the same report that cardboard was being used instead of glass. I do not know whether it was that glass was not available but in any event there was not available a maintenance man to fit it. The fact remains that these people, who are protecting the State, were living and sleeping under those conditions. It is totally unacceptable that the workshops in various barracks are not up to the minimum statutory health and safety standards.

I also note that the Commission recommend that working conditions at the Apprentice School should be improved to ensure that they comply with basic standards of FÁS training establishments. Surely that is not too much to expect? Those requirements, small as they may be, need a commitment from the Government and a concerned Minister to provide the extra finance. I very much regret that such finance has not been provided in the budget. In the light of these problems, some of which I have highlighted and previously addressed in the course of my contributions on the Estimate — indeed I make no apology for repeating some of them here this evening — it is totally unacceptable that at a time when buildings and barracks are falling down, the Defence capital building programme has been further reduced by £2 million in the budget. Throughout the years the position in relation to the condition of buildings has been highlighted time and time again but the inadequate estimate has been further reduced by £2 million. Perhaps the incoming Minister will take note of that. Expenditure has been reduced from £7 million to £5 million, a further indication, if one is required——

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 5 Feb 1991