Vol. 420 No. 6
16 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if his attention had been drawn to the financial difficulties of a person (details supplied) when he was appointed as inspector into the affairs of Greencore which were confirmed recently by various financial institutions; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
29 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if his attention had been drawn to the financial difficulties of a person (details supplied) at the time of his appointment as Inspector to the Greencore Inquiry; and, if not, the steps he took to ascertain his financial standing and suitability at the time of appointment.
36 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if his attention has been drawn to the fact that a person (details supplied) was experiencing financial difficulties before he recommended to the High Court his appointment as an inspector into the affairs of Siúicre Éireann cpt and related companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 16, 29 and 36 together.
When I nominated the person in question for appointment as an inspector I was not aware of any reason which would have precluded him from being so appointed by the High Court. Clearly, the High Court which appointed him also had no reason to doubt his professional competence.
Would the Minister accept it has been difficult for Mr. Aidan Barry, the inspector involved, to produce a short inquiry——
I would prefer if the Deputy did not mention a name, even though it is identifiable.
Would the Minister accept it was difficult for one of the High Court inspectors to produce a short report into the affairs of Greencore in view of his financial difficulties, which have been confirmed? The fact that the Minister and the Government accepted that those inspectors be paid at the daily rate of £1,750, plus expenses, and in view of this information there would be no incentive for any inspector to produce a short report? Would the Minister further accept that one of the High Court inspectors received a letter from the Government confirming the level of fees in order to produce it to financial institutions as collateral? Finally, in view of this information would he accept that he did not check out thoroughly the appointment of this inspector and that he made a grave mistake in that appointment subsequently?
The Deputy has asked a very large number of supplementary questions and I am not sure I can remember them all. To suggest that because somebody is paid on a daily basis he wants to prolong the matter as long as possible is unfair. That allegation was contained in the question as originally submitted but was deleted by the Ceann Comhairle as being an improper imputation. If you want to make that imputation you could make it against any lawyer in any court case because he is being paid, in addition to a brief fee, a daily refresher fee also. Any professional person's obligations are that he finish the task on which he is engaged as expeditiously as possible, consonant with his duty to do a good job.
It is impossible to make a detailed personal check on the affairs of everybody who might be appointed to any particular post. If somebody holds membership of a particular institute of society a Minister, or indeed any other citizen, is entitled to assume that that person by virtue of his membership of that institute complies with what one would call the normal professional requirements. In the case of the two inspectors, one was a senior counsel and the other was a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland. It seemed to me that their professional qualifications were more than adequate for the job concerned and that appears to have been borne out as the view of the High Court also who appointed them quite readily.
I am calling Deputy Rabbitte, whose Question No. 36 refers.
May I ask the Minister, with regard to the reported story about this hard working inspector who, effectively advanced his prospective fees as collateral against business dealings, whether the banks in question sought documentary evidence that those fees would be forthcoming either from the Minister and his Department or from any other Government Department?
I should have said in reply to Deputy Hogan — I overlooked it — but I can say it now in reply to Deputy Rabbitte that no letter of the kind concerned was sought from me or from my Department nor was it provided by me or my Department. Beyond that I cannot say anything and I do not wish to comment.
The arrangement in respect of fees, as I remember it, was with the Department of Justice. Can the Minister say if the Department of Justice or the Minister for Justice were required——
That is clearly a matter for another Minister.
That is correct and I accept it, but it may well be that the Minister could and would want to answer it.
Deputy Spring is offering.
May I ask the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he is aware of the fact that on the Saturday night after the issue of interference with the inspector mentioned in this question and after a discussion took place in this House, a very senior member of the Minister's own party paid a visit to the inspector's home and applied pressure to him in relation to certain matters? Is the Minister aware that that happened and would he condone such conduct by a senior member of this own party?
First, I should point out that I am not answerable to this House for the actions of anybody other than myself, and I do not think that a question like that is properly put in this House. However, lest the insinuation or innuendo in the question go unanswered, and without prejudice to what I believe to be the proper legal and parliamentary position in regard to it, I would say that it was made abundantly clear in a report which appeared in the Irish Independent on Monday last that the person to whom the Deputy refers was asked by the gentleman who is the subject of these questions to visit him in his professional capacity for the purpose of advising him in regard to certain legal problems which had arisen for him. The person to whom the Deputy refers complied with that request in his professional capacity and offered such advice as, to him, seemed appropriate. I think it was perfectly proper for him to do so, and to suggest in any way that there is any impropriety in his doing so is, in my view, quite wrong.
This matter must come to finality. I will hear a brief question from Deputy Rabbitte and a final one from Deputy Hogan.
Is the Minister saying that he denies absolutely any suggestion that the prominent member of his party concerned was acting as a go-between between himself and the former inspector?
I would be concerned about reflections on persons outside the House.
The position, as has been made quite clear publicly by the man concerned, is that he was consulted in a professional capacity and he attended on the inspector in question at that inspector's request for the purpose of affording such legal advice as was asked of him. I am not aware that he attended in any other capacity.
Would the Minister accept that the person we are referring to, a member of his party, was very concerned that the High Court inspector involved would not actually seek to clarify the presence of notes and logs which would have embroiled the Minister in some controversy as a result of an article that appeared in The Sunday Business Post on 8 March about alleged interference by the Minister into the conduct of the Greencore inquiry? Does the Minister intend to pursue those legal proceedings at the earliest opportunity in view of the fact that he was clearly annoyed that his integrity was impugned at the time? When will he take the first opportunity to clear his name?
I am seeking to take every opportunity. I do not believe that my name needs clearing. I have been the subject of persistent attacks of a personal nature over a period of several months now in every issue of a certain newspaper, obviously for some particular purpose connected, I think, with another event. I deplore the fact that I am subjected continually to these attacks week after week but I do not believe that those who carry on this or who inspire it will achieve their objectives, nor will they deflect me from what I see as my duty.
Let me put it to the Minister for Industry and Commerce that he, as a qualified lawyer, must be well aware of the longstanding precedent in the legal profession that senior counsel, or indeed junior counsel, would not attend upon a client without an accompanying solicitor or, indeed, in the absence of a request from a solicitor?
If the Deputy wants to make a complaint to the Bar Council about that matter, I am sure he knows the manner in which he can do it but if he thinks, at the same time, that every member of the Bar speaks to a member of the public only in the presence of a solicitor then the Deputy is being somewhat naive and I do not think the world would work very effectively if that were done.
