Jim Higgins
Question:3 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he had a formal meeting with the president of UCD in 1990; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Carysfort College.
I met the President of University College Dublin on 12 December 1990. I was accompanied by the then Minister for Education and the president was accompanied by Mr. Laurence Crowley, chairman of the UCD Graduate Business School.
That meeting took place against the background of concern over a considerable period by the Government, the third level institutions and the social partners under the Programme for National Recovery about the need to provide more places at third level to meet the unsatisfied demand each year for entry to third level. For example, the presidents of the universities, at their request, met with me and the then Minister for Education in September, 1989, to express their concern and ability to provide extra places if additional Government funding could be provided and if the universities could retain the extra fee income without prejudice to their HEA grants. As a result of that meeting, 3,600 extra places are being provided over three years and the Government have approved capital grants of £15 million and annual grants of £3 million. Under the Programme for Economic and Social Progress provision is made for 8,800 extra third level places, including the 3,600 I have mentioned and over 600 extra places to be provided at Belfield as a result of the location of the graduate business school in Carysfort.
The meeting on 12 December, 1990, therefore, discussed these extra 600 places and also discussed the importance of the proposed school of business management for the development of improved management education in Ireland which is relatively underdeveloped by comparison with larger economies. It is a common criticism of Irish business development that we are lacking in modern management training and education.
The meeting also took place against the background of the fact that the Government, in July 1988, had asked the then Minister for Education to seek to find a third level use for Carysfort College with particular reference to UCD. The then Minister has already in her speech to this House on 18 October 1991 given a full account of her efforts in that regard culminating in the decision, in principle, by the Government on 4 December 1990 to grant aid UCD to use Carysfort College as the location of its school of business management.
At the meeting on 12 December 1990, therefore, an issue was the amount of grant required by UCD to enable it to acquire, adapt and equip Carysfort College in the light of the Government decision already taken on 4 December 1990. It was established that the grant needed by UCD to supplement its funding of £2 million was £9.7 million of which £6 million was towards the cost of acquisition. This grant of £9.7 million was sanctioned by the Minister for Finance on 18 December 1990. He also sanctioned the introduction of the necessary supplementary Estimate which was, in fact, passed by the Dáil on that day.
Can we now have the truth? Why did the Taoiseach tell this House on 16 October that — and I quote——
The Deputy cannot quote at Question Time. It is a long standing rule and practice.
The Taoiseach told this House that the transaction was carried out in a perfectly straightforward fashion, which was not the case. The Taoiseach also told this House——
They are not questions.
——that "I was not involved". Does the Taoiseach not accept that not alone was he involved but he actually orchestrated the entire deal?
Let us have brief, relevant, succinct questions?
Does the Taoiseach not admit that he had his meeting on 12 December with the Minister, Mr. Laurence Crowley and the President of UCD and two other meetings, one on 11 October 1990, a secret meeting without the knowledge of his Minister for Education, with Mr. Laurence Crowley——
Deputy Higgins continues to impart information.
I am not.
(Interruptions.)
The Deputy is imparting information rather than seeking it. This is Question Time.
He is asking.
(Interruptions.)
Can I ask the Taoiseach——
The Deputy should be allowed to ask his question and should not be restrained.
(Interruptions.)
Did the Taoiseach have a meeting with Mr. Laurence Crowley on 11 October 1990 at which nobody else was present? Did the Taoiseach not have a further meeting with Mr. Laurence Crowley on 3 December 1990, another secret meeting at which nobody else was present? Will the Taoiseach answer "yes" or "no"?
The meeting which was held on 12 December between the President of UCD, who was accompanied by Mr. Laurence Crowley, the Minister for Education and myself was a public meeting in my office. There was nothing particularly secret about it. It was well known to quite a number of people.
That was not the question.
It was for the purpose which I have outlined. I fully supported at all times the concept of providing extra places in Belfield by moving the graduate school to Carysfort. I fully supported the idea of a business management school and was anxious to see it coming onstream. I supported the whole concept right along the line. I had that meeting with the President, Mr. Laurence Crowley and the Minister for Education to make sure that the transaction or the project was pushed forward as satisfactorily as possible and that all the necessary financial aspects of it were attended to. When I said to this House that the transaction was upfront and straightforward, that is exactly what it was. I said I was not involved. I was not involved in the transaction.
(Interruptions.)
The transaction had nothing to do with the Government or the Department of Education. The transaction was conducted by the business graduate school——
A Deputy
With our money.
Let us hear the reply.
——and UCD.
That is absurd.
I was not involved in it in any way. I had no part in those negotiations. My discussions with Laurence Crowley on two occasions and with the President and Laurence Crowley on another occasion were entirely in the context of ascertaining the exact finances of the proposal, how the fund raising was going——
(Interruptions.)
For whom?
If the Deputies do not want the information, that is all right with me. The position was that this organisation, the business graduate school, was in the fund raising business. They were setting out to raise considerable funds from the private sector to enable them to establish the sort of business management school they wish to have. I fully supported Laurence Crowley in his efforts to do that. I discussed it with him and gave him support and offered full support to him in his endeavours in that regard. I had nothing whatsoever to do with the transaction of the purchase of Carysfort. That was a matter which was handled by Laurence Crowley, the business management school and the UCD authorities.
Does the Taoiseach not realise that this was not his function? Does the Taoiseach not realise that he and the Minister totally usurped the role of the Higher Education Authority, that he failed to disclose to Cabinet that there was an independent valuation done by the State Valuation Office of £3.8 million that, effectively, he handed a profit of £1.5 million to a friend of his, Mr. Pino Harris, and does he not furthermore realise that in doing so he flouted the advice of the Department of Finance?
The last suggestion by Deputy Higgins is completely reprehensible and I do not think that in all good faith he should make those sorts of false and groundless allegations here.
First, it was my business. I have had this argument here in this House before with Deputies who seem to think that I should never meet anybody, that I should confine myself to my office and not get involved in any of the Government's business.
It would save the taxpayer a lot of money.
I have explained that that is not the way I see the office of Taoiseach. I involve myself in countless numbers of projects which I think are desirable and which I think need my assistance as Taoiseach to get them advanced as quickly as possible through the normal Government process. I was fully supportive of the Carysfort proposal. I backed it in every way. I took every action available to me as Taoiseach to make sure that it went through satisfactorily and that all the necessary financial aspects were attended to.
Pino's pence.
With regard to the Higher Education Authority, both the former and the present Minister for Education have explained fully the situation in that regard, but I can recall for the Deputy, if he is interested, that in 1973 when a Fine Gael Minister for Education made announcements about developments in third level education in this country and was taken to task by the then Chairman of the Higher Education Authority, that Government sought and received adice from the Attorney General and were told that it was none of the business of the Chairman of the Higher Education Authority to dictate to the Minister for Education what he or she might do.
You are badly stuck for precendents.
Deputy Higgins has taken a long time to ask questions which have a whole lot of innuendo. I just want to give the House a bit of background to this situation. When I met President Masterson there were three things of concern to me. First of all was the major need——
Be very careful now.
——for the Government to provide additional third level education places. The second was the decision of the Government that some educational use should be found for Carysfort, preferably in a UCD context. The third was the fact that I have known the President of UCD for many years. I meet him three, four or five times every year. Since he has taken over as President of UCD, he has maintained constant contact with me. He is a dynamic, active President of UCD. He has far reaching, enlightened plans for the development of a centre of excellence in UCD. He has kept me fully informed of those plans and meets me from time to time to tell me about them and seek my support for them. It was against that background and those factors that I have mentioned that I met Deputy O'Rourke as Minister for Education, President Masterson and Laurence Crowley at a final meeting to make sure——
And "Deputy" Harris.
——that the whole transaction would go ahead smoothly, that it would be adequately financed——
Why did the Taoiseach not tell us this before?
——and at that meeting we ascertained from UCD that £2 million was about the maximum they could put up. Then we decided what the State's contribution would be and how it would be provided. It was a perfectly legitimate exercise of Government authority to promote a well worthwhile project which will provide extra third level education places, which will be responsible for providing us with an excellent business management school. In any other parliament in the world, the Government involved would be commended for such efforts.
You will have to resign.
Order. I am calling Deputy Spring but I wish to say also that I will call Members of the other two Opposition parties. I want to assert that we can have no debate on this matter now.
Only one party has a question tabled.
Please, Deputy, allow the Chair to make its comments also. That is audacious of the Deputy.
(Interruptions.)
Audacious timing, I think.
We shall see. As Deputies are well aware, there are other means open to them to have a full debate on this matter. I wish to advise the House that there are today two motions on the Order Paper on this subject. Therefore, there will be that opportunity to debate the matter proper in the House.
Not necessarily.
Also, this matter is still before the Committee of Public Accounts and, strictly speaking, we ought to await the outcome of their deliberations before proceeding with the matter. However, the Chair is granted a certain discretion in this matter and, therefore, I wish Deputies to be brief and relevant and I will see to it that there can be no debate now.
Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. I shall try to adhere to your guidance in this matter. Let me put it to the Taoiseach that it is extremely difficult for this House to accept that what he is saying has any degree of credibility given that some weeks ago he was saying that he had no involvement whatever in the purchase or sale of Carysfort.
Can I answer that?
That is what the Taoiseach said before in this House.
I want to answer that.
I did not interrupt the Taoiseach.
The Taoiseach said that on 16 October.
With respect, I did not interrupt the Taoiseach and I will put all the questions to him together.
What the Deputy wants to use Question Time for——
Order.
You said it on 16 October in the House.
Let us have order. I have asked for brief, relevant single questions——
That is the first question. The second one——
Without interruptions and without having them strung together.
I think it is a question of the nature of the relationship at this stage.
Second, I want to put it to the Taoiseach that prior to his first meeting with Mr. Crowley there was no mention on any UCD documentation of Carysfort as a possible location for a graduate business school. In fact we were going to get a graduate business school without any cost to the taxpayer or to the State.
Thirdly, ——
A question, please.
I am asking the question. Is the Taoiseach now standing over the procedures which he engaged in in relation to this decision — no Cabinet memorandum, no discussion in Cabinet? Lastly, did it not dawn on you at any stage that because the vendor was a close political associate of yours——
He is not.
He is.
He is not. That is a lie.
He is, of your party, and you know it.
No. I demand a withdrawal.
Deputy Spring, there should be no reference to persons outside this House nor should they be referred to so as to be identifiable. It is wrong. This is a privileged assembly.
Instead of being involved in this you should have kept well away from it.
I have become accustomed in this House to Deputy Spring making false and groundless allegations.
You have already had to come in and retract that.
Just leave it to Deputy Spring. One slander is enough from those benches.
You have already marched up the hill.
I have become quite accustomed in this House to Deputy Spring making groundless, false allegations which he never follows up.
Can you stand over that?
This is outrageous.
All these allegations which Deputy Spring has made a profession of making here in this House without any follow up have never been substantiated by Deputy Spring. Nor will this particular allegation be substantiated but I suggest——
Answer the questions.
——that it is about time Deputy Spring showed some credibility and some responsibility.
Answer the questions.
I will deal with the questions. First of all I said in this House that I was not involved in the transaction. Neither was I involved in the transaction.
You said you were not involved at all.
You just dictated it.
I was fully supportive of the whole project from beginning to end.
You orchestrated it. Will you answer the questions?
The Deputy does not want the answers. He just wants his slanders to be left unanswered because you have now become, Deputy Spring, a professional slanderer.
Answer the three questions.
In my reply to this House I spoke about the transaction and I said I was not involved in the transaction, nor was I involved in any way in the transaction. I knew nothing about the details of it but I fully supported the project because it was a good project and it was completely in harmony with the Government decision to provide extra third level places in education. It was completely in accordance with that. It was an ideal use for Carysfort. As regards the last particularly slanderous allegation Deputy Spring has made, I throw that back in your teeth, Deputy Spring.
It is true.
Mr. Harris is not a political friend of mine, of any kind, of no kind.
The Taoiseach has no friends at this stage.
I have a very good friends in president Paddy Masterson of UCD. I have a very good friend in Laurence Crowley, Chairman of the business school of management UCD.
That is not what he told the Committee of Public Accounts.
Pino Harris is not a friend?
I co-operated with both those people in their official positions to bring this very important project to a successful conclusion.
Your friends go up and down.
I just want to say——
There should be no personal abuse involved, please.
——that the business management school in Carysfort will be there for many long years to come, providing benefits for this country, long after these petty, slanderous allegations have been consigned to the dustbin of history.
That is nonsense.
Deputy Gilmore.
Deputy J. Bruton rose.
I said I will call the Deputy.
The Taoiseach now seems to be drawing a distinction between what he now calls "the transaction" and the process which led to the Government decision to purchase Carysfort. May I ask him, first, when did the Government change their mind about buying Carysfort given that for 18 months prior to that the Government had quite clearly indicated that they did not wish to buy Carysfort? Second, may I ask him if the idea to buy Carysfort came from him and if he suggested to the then Minister for Education that she should contact UCD about the purchase of Carysfort? May I further ask him, since we have now established that there were meetings with the president of UCD and the chairman of the graduate business school, if he had any meetings, contact or discussions with the owners of Carysfort or with the estate agents acting on their behalf prior to the Minister for Education contacting UCD?
We are having repetition.
Let me take the last question first, to which the answer is no. I have already told——
Of any kind?
No, of no kind. I have already told the House that. I was not aware of any of the detailed transactions and I had no connection or involvement with them. They were carried out by the UCD authorities at one remove from the Government. On the second point, I did not take any initiative in this regard with the Minister for Education. It was the Minister for Education and the UCD authorities who brought forward this proposal.
Did you ask them?
(Limerick East): Where is she today?
On the third point, we were in a position coming to the end of 1990 as a Government to provide extra funds for third level education, of a capital nature, because our EBR for that year was well below what had been projected.
I could give you a few projections.
So it was very good financial business on our part to bring in a Supplementary Estimate for the provision of that amount of money in 1990——
Do you call giving £1.5 million to Pino Harris good financial business?
——When it was well within the scope of the EBR to carry that amount. That is why we provided the money to UCD to buy the premises in 1990.
Pino Harris is on the truck's back.
I want to remind Deputy Gilmore, who has had all this out with the Minister for Education — I do not know why he is going over all of it again — that the Government took a decision in 1988 to put Carysfort to some useful third level educational purpose.
Why did you not buy it in 1989?
It did not arise then.
Deputies should not put questions from a sitting position.
We had no particular purpose at that time——
There were plenty of purposes.
——but when we got a suitable tenant and a suitable use in the form of the graduate business school we availed of that. That is the simple truth of the matter.
A final question from Deputy Bruton.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he would agree that Taoisigh and Ministers, should always be fully frank as well as truthful in this House in their answers concerning public money? May I ask him, in that context, when he addressed this matter on 16 October, why he did not tell the House about his meetings with Mr. Crowley on 11 October and 3 December 1990? May I further ask the Taoiseach, in view of his obvious intimate knowledge of this project, why he did not insist that the Valuation Office valuation of the site be communicated to the full Cabinet, to both parties, at the time the Cabinet approved the Supplementary Estimate? In view of the fact that the Taoiseach agreed;——
I did ask for brevity.
This is the last question. In view of the fact that the Taoiseach agreed, in respect of similar questions in regard to Greencore, that he would be willing to give evidence on oath before any tribunal on that matter, would he agree to give evidence on oath before the Committee of Public Accounts on this matter on his involvement in it?
I will give all the information at my disposal on this matter to this House; it is not the practice for Ministers or Taoisigh to appear before committees of this House and I do not intend to depart from that practice. There is no need to do so. I am quite prepared to give the House the fullest information at my disposal about every aspect of this transaction because they all stand up fully to public scrutiny. In regard to the question the Deputy asked me relating to my contribution on 16 October——
11 October.
—the reference to the Carysfort transaction came in the middle of a longer speech which covered a whole variety of matters. There was no particular need or purpose to mention any particular meetings in that connection. I simply made the statement that it was an upfront, straightforward transaction in which I was not involved and that I adhere to now. There was nothing secret about any of my meetings in this matter. The meetings with Laurence Crowley and the meetings with president Masterson were in my office, going through my usual secretarial procedures, known to everybody in my office and known to lots of other people as well. It is an absolute negation of truth to add these sort of words about secret meetings; there was nothing secret about them. They were open meetings with people I knew and trusted and with whom I was working very closely to bring a very important educational project to fruition.
Ceist a ceathair.
What about the Valuation Office valuation?
I was not aware of any such valuation.
A Cheann Comhairle, when I spoke to you earlier you promised that you would allow me——
Please, Deputy. You have had a very good innings on this question.
What about the Valuation Office valuation?
Order, I have advised the House that they will have a full opportunity of debating this matter properly. There are two substantive motions on the Order Paper concerning the matter. I am now going on to another question.
A Cheann Comhairle, you promised that you would allow me to ask three supplementary questions.
I have fulfilled my promise to the Deputy. Ceist a ceathair.
Excuse me, you promised me that you would allow me to ask three supplementary questions.
Deputy Higgins, there shall be little conversation between you and me on a private matter ever again.
You gave me a promise.
(Interruptions.)
May I ask a question about the phone calls on 21 December?
Ceist a ceathair. Deputy Higgins should restrain himself.
On a point of order——
This is hardly a point of order but I will accept it.
Would the Ceann Comhairle not agree that it would be conducive to good order in this House if the Taoiseach were to answer all the questions he has been asked, in particular the question as to why the Valuation Office valuation was not disclosed to the Cabinet?
I have answered that but the Deputy did not hear me because his colleagues were being obstreperous.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy J. Higgins rose.
Order, please. Deputy Higgins, resume your seat.
I want to ask a supplementary question.
You will not bully the Chair, Deputy.
I have told Deputy Bruton that I was not aware of that valuation. I was not in any way aware of it.
Is the Taoiseach serious?
Yes, I am serious. I had no particular knowledge of any of the various financial transactions and valuations.
Have you any money left over this year?
The Deputy has asked me a question and I am giving him the answer. I was not aware of any such valuation.
Any such valuation?
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
On a point of order——
Deputy, resume your seat. I have heard the point of order.
Did you not agree today to allow me to ask three supplementary questions?
I allowed you some supplementary questions, Deputy. You have had them.
I want to ask a brief supplementary question.
Deputies
Chair.
Deputy Higgins, the Chair will be obeyed.
May I ask a supplementary question?
Deputy Higgins, allow me to speak. I have allowed this question to go on for, shall we say, half an hour. If Members are dissatisfied with the Taoiseach's reply, they have remedy as I have outlined to them. The matter ends now. I have called Ceist a ceathair.
(Interruptions.)
On a point of order——
If the disorder continues, I shall have no option but to adjourn the House.
I do not wish to be disorderly.
Deputy J. Higgins rose.
I have ruled on the matter. The Deputy talks about the truth. As I have notified the House already, the Committee of Public Accounts are dealing with this matter also.
This is a matter of accountability to the Dáil.
(Interruptions.)
The Taoiseach has said that he will not give evidence to the Committee of Public Accounts.
(Interruptions.)
The Taoiseach has said that he will not go before the Committee of Public Accounts.
A Cheann Comhairle, you suggested properly that since there are two motions on the Order Paper we might have an opportunity to debate the issue. However, when you made that suggestion you did not imply that the Taoiseach would be in the House to answer specific questions.
Exactly.
The point of Question Time is to ask precise questions in the hope of getting precise replies. The Taoiseach was asked a question to which he did not reply——
Which one?
He was asked why the normal Cabinet procedures in relation to documentation were not adhered to in respect of this sale and he did not get an opportunity——
Is that the subject of your question, Deputy Quinn?
No.
The Taoiseach has indicated a willingness to reply. I will hear a very brief question each from Deputy Jim Higgins, Deputy Quinn and Deputy Rabbitte.
In fact, subject to your rulings on questions, I invite Deputies to put down all the questions they like on this matter and I will deal with them.
The Taoiseach has been transferring questions of that nature.
This is a transparent matter and there is absolutely nothing to hide on the part of the Government.
There is nothing to hide when things are found out.
There is a procedure which is frequently followed by Government Ministers in this — and other — Governments in regard to this matter and it was followed on this occasion. The procedure of bringing the matter to Government in a certain way, getting a Government decision and following up the Government decision on the basis of bringing in a Supplementary Estimate here was all gone through. It was perfectly open, legitimate and above board.
Was there a memorandum.
When that Supplementary Estimate was going through the House all the Deputies had an opportunity to raise questions. However, all sides praised the Government and the Minister for what they were doing.
We asked about value for money.
I am leaving the Deputy's party out of it but other parties praised the Government.
Not so.
I know that the Labour Party did not. The Estimate was brought before this House and debated; the attitude and initiative of the Government were warmly praised on the Fine Gael benches and by Deputy Gilmore.
What about value for money?
Clearly, this cannot go on indeterminately. I will hear a brief question from Deputy Rabbitte and a final one from Deputy Jim Higgins.
Having regard to the fact that the Taoiseach said he had no involvement in these transactions why did he feel it necessary on 21 December last year to telephone Dr. Masterson, when UCD were apparently not proceding with the purchase, to persuade him to conclude the transaction and to give him a guarantee that he would cover the incremental costs for the years ahead? It now emerges that this did not have Cabinet approval.
That is typical of the way the Deputy twists things and of his approach.
Answer the question.
Because of the slanderous, unfounded allegations which Deputy Rabbitte is making he is losing credibility, not me.
Answer the question. The Taoiseach will not intimidate me.
(Interruptions.)
Mr. Dermot Desmond will not intimidate me either.
Will the Taoiseach answer the question.
There was nothing unusual in a telephone conversation between myself and President Paddy Masterson. It was not earth-shattering. As I said, I have been in touch with him four or five times every year since he assumed the presidency of UCD about all kinds of matters in connection with UCD which, incidentally is my alma mater. The last time I met him was in 1990 when he did me the honour of conferring an honorary degree from UCD on me.
Answer the question.
I answered the question. I do not think that the Deputies opposite really want answers. They have used Question Time to make unfounded, slanderous allegations. They abuse Question Time.
The Taoiseach has brought the issue of evading questions to a fine art.
Deputy Spring has become a professional slanderer and he does not have any credibility left.
Answer the question.
I am calling Deputy Jim Higgins.
I asked a question and I did not get an answer, just personal abuse. With the utmost respect for the Chair, I put a straigtforward, legitimate question, based on what Dr. Masterson told me as a member of the Committee of Public Accounts to the Taoiseach asking him why he made a telephone call on 21 December——
The Chair has no control over the replies of Ministers or the Taoiseach.
What about an answer?
There was absolutely no need for me to say anything to President Paddy Masterson on 21 December about the purchase of Carysfort because that decision had been taken on 12 December, indeed it was taken by the Government on 4 December. The Deputies may not like the answers but I am giving them. My telephone conversation with President Masterson on 21 December dealt entirely with the question of the running costs of the business management school. It was a perfectly legitimate telephone call on my part because it was a very important matter from the point of view of the business graduate school.
What did the Taoiseach promise them?
How much did the Taoiseach promise?
On one side the President of UCD, the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Valuation Office, the Chairman of the Higher Education Authority and the Department of Finance say one thing and on the other side we hear a discredited version of events from the former Minister for Education who has abandoned ship here today.
(Interruptions.)
The Deputies are using Question Time to make allegations.
Will the Taoiseach appear before the Committee of Public Accounts and give evidence like those honourable people?
I am calling Question No. 4.
Deputy G. FitzGerald rose.
We have devoted quite a lot of time to this question and I now wish to move on. I have given Deputies an indication as to how they can pursue this matter further. However, I will hear a question from Deputy Garret FitzGerald.
The Taoiseach made a statement that in bringing the matter before the Cabinet involving expenditure of money without a memorandum to Cabinet he was following the procedure used by previous Governments. Is it not a case that, since the foundation of the State, the procedures laid down and adhered to were that no proposal for the expenditure of money may appear before Cabinet unless it has first gone to the Department of Finance so that they will have an opportunity over a specified period to comment before it comes to Government? Did the Taoiseach follow that procedure and, if not, why?
That is total rubbish.
It certainly is not.
I am glad that Deputy Garret FitzGerald has intervened because I should like to point out that when he was Taoiseach he spent a lot of his time meeting his friends in UCD.
Dr. G. Fitzgerald
Answer the question.
On many occasions——
May I ask a question?
Does anyone come up to the Taoiseach's standards?
Certainly not the Deputy.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that what Deputy Garret FitzGerald said is true?
This is totally out of order.
I asked the Minister for Finance to confirm that what Deputy FitzGerald said is incontrovertibly true.
This is totally out of order.
It is not true and the Deputy's Government never adhered to it.
It is true and we did adhere to it. The Taoiseach did not adhere to it in this case and the result is disastrous for this country and for the Taoiseach's career.
If order is not restored I propose to adjourn the House. I am now calling Question No. 4.
On a point of order, may I seek your guidance, a Cheann Comhairle? In response to a supplementary question the Chair ruled out reference to parties outside this House and I should like him to confirm that the Progressive Democrats Party can be defined as persons outside this House.
Please, Deputy.
Have they agreed to the Estimates yet?