Vol. 422 No. 4
1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he proposes to revise or otherwise change the standards and the procedures which he should adopt in replying to parliamentary questions in view of his commitment to open Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
As I indicated to the Dáil on 18 February last, in reply to a question on my style of leadership, it is my intention to answer as many questions as are appropriate to me in this House.
In responding to parliamentary questions I will continue to be as open and transparent about the background and the reasons for my actions and decisions, giving as much information as possible, provided that adequate notice is given of the information required. However, certain sensitive areas of Government familiar to the Deputy will continue to require discretion to protect the national interest or prevent injustice——
Would it be possible for the Taoiseach to read this again, as his delivery is almost inaudible?
(Limerick East): The Taoiseach is mumbling.
That is simply not true. It is insulting to hear such a remark across the House.
I cannot hear the Taoiseach either.
Please, Deputies.
I object to personal remarks like that when the reply is being read out clearly and Deputy Quinn who put down the question did not object.
So long as the Taoiseach does not sue us.
Let us improve the atmosphere. Let us proceed in orderly fashion.
Audible fashion, I would suggest.
Please, Deputy, desist.
Is the Taoiseach giving me the Haughey stare now?
Courtesy is very important.
I will read the reply from the beginning.
As I indicated to the Dáil on 18 February last, in reply to a question on my style of leadership, it is my intention to answer as many questions as are appropriate to me in this House.
In responding to parliamentary questions I will continue to be as open and transparent about the background and the reasons for my actions and decisions, giving as much information as possible, provided that adequate notice is given of the information required. However, certain sensitive areas of Government familiar to the Deputy will continue to require discretion to protect the national interest or prevent injustice to individuals. In these circumstances, I will try to ensure that party leaders or Members of the House who need to know will be told the background, confidentially, in so far as I am aware of it.
On 1 May last, the Government submitted proposals to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges for the reform of the procedures relating to parliamentary questions, including new arrangements for Taoiseach's Question Time. These proposals, along with proposals submitted by the other parties, are due to be considered by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges's working group on Dáil reform and it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on them at this time.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. From my experience as an office holder I am aware of the substantial resources available to a Department and to a Minister in the preparation of replies to questions. Would the Taoiseach not share my concern — unprompted by Deputy Flaherty's intervention — that there has been a regrettable anti-democratic practice creeping into the halls of the various Departments of denying Deputies the maximum information, giving Deputies as little information as possible and making it as difficult as possible for us to obtain the answer to a question? I will cite one specific example.
Not too long, Deputy, please.
There have been numerous questions about the application of lottery funds for amenity grants. I calculated that 49 questions were put down to various Ministers in respect of that matter since the Dáil resumed in October and all Deputies were told simply that there was no scheme for 1992.
Please, Deputy Quinn. The Deputy seems to be imparting a lot of information, rather than seeking it. Let us conform to the procedure at Question Time.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that such an unwitting attempt by Ministers in the various Departments to prevent Deputies from having access to information which must be democratically accounted for is against the spirit of the Republican Constitution of which we are all proud? Will the Taoiseach assure this House that he will give instructions to ensure that that practice will not prevail any longer in any of the Departments, if he is committed to open Government?
Please, Deputy Quinn. That is quite a speech.
The Deputy would agree that on many occasions since I became Taoiseach I have been criticised for giving answers which were too long rather than too short. I have never withheld information. I try to be as informative as I can be. If there are any instances where other Departments are falling into the trap of giving minimum information, as suggested by the Deputy, I will have the message transmitted to all Departments that this House is to be given the maximum amount of information consistent with the parameters I have set out in my answer.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that the purpose of parliamentary questions is to allow Members to obtain information within a minimum of four days in relation to matters of public importance?
Of course. I do not see any other purpose in having Question Time except to gather information in accordance with the rules of the House.
Can the Taoiseach then stand over a situation in which questions put down by me and three other Members two weeks ago are finally being answered today as Questions Nos. 83, 84 and 85 to the Minister for Finance, in relation to nuclear loans approved by the Taoiseach personally? The questions have gone the rounds. They went to the Minister for Energy who refused to answer them in the House and refused to deal with the issues as he said that they were not his responsibility. They then went back to the Taoiseach's office and they were again transferred, this time to the Minister for Finance. Does the Taoiseach consider that is honouring the spirit of democracy?
I reject entirely that something was approved by me personally, as the Deputy said, I do not personally approve anything. The office which I held at any time would be an instrument. For the Deputy to say that I approved of something as Taoiseach and then did not take the question is not accurate. The question was sent to the Department of Energy because it related to an energy matter but it transpired that more information was available in a different Department and that it was later transferred to that Department.
Why did the Taoiseach not say this directly in the House?
Let me assure the Taoiseach that I fully accept what he has just said. In view of the enormous discrepancy between what he has authorised and what has happened, which is downright evasion by Department officials, will he personally take it upon himself to ensure that the standards to which the elected Members are entitled will be upheld when we resume in the autumn?
I have already stated quite clearly and unequivocally that I will not stand over officials evading giving information where it is possible to supply it.
Having to wait two weeks to get a reply is evasion.
We will always have the problem of knowing which Department has the information, but we will eventually find out.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the considerable dissatisfaction of the Independent Deputies about the way priority question time works, particularly on a Tuesday when the questions are addressed to the Taoiseach? Usually there are a great many questions to the Taoiseach on a Tuesday and the only questions generally reached are those given priority. No doubt the Taoiseach is aware that the Independent Deputies are not entitled to table any priority questions and, furthermore, if our questions are taken in conjunction with priority questions — and this will probably happen to my question today — I am not entitled to ask any supplementary questions.
I am afraid we are straying from the subject matter quite considerably.
Does the Taoiseach agree this should be looked at?
There are proposals before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges on how questions to the Taoiseach operate on a Tuesday and I am sure this matter which the Deputy raises will fall within that ambit.
In his earlier reply, the Taoiseach indicated that he always gave comprehensive replies to questions. I do not think that was the reason the question was tabled to him. Would the Taoiseach agree that Members experience great difficulties in getting a definite answer from some Departments, particularly from the Department of Agriculture and Food? Quite often this leaves a Deputy more frustrated. If the Department gave the Deputy the specific information he requested, he would not have to resort to tabling a parliamentary question. Would the Taoiseach investigate that specific complaint?
I understand this question was tabled to all Ministers and they will be responding in turn. I am sure the Deputy heard my response to Deputy Quinn's question.
(Limerick East): The Taoiseach may recall that a few years ago Members were most dissatisfied with the replies from the Department of Social Welfare but they are now easily the best in replying to Deputies. The Department of Agriculture and Food have the worst record in this respect. Would the Taoiseach ensure that the procedures that are now in place in the Department of Social Welfare are put in place in the Department of Agriculture and Food so that we can get the information from the Department?
I can certainly give the Deputy that assurance and I will take the matter up with that Department.
