Vol. 430 No. 6
1 Mr. Cox asked the Taoiseach if provision has been made or is required to be made in the Estimates of his Department to indemnify him for costs incurred in respect of civil actions initiated by him since becoming Taoiseach; if so, the estimated amount involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
2 Mr. Cox asked the Taoiseach if any departmental guidelines have been drawn up in respect of indemnifying the Taoiseach of the day for costs incurred by the Taoiseach in respect of civil actions initiated by him; the distinction drawn in such circumstances between the Taoiseach acting in his public capacity and as a private individual; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The answer to both questions is in the negative. A Taoiseach or Minister does not need to be indemnified for any actions in their public capacity.
With regard to civil actions initiated by me in a private capacity, I have not sought nor been given any indemnity.
Following that extensive answer and having waited a long time to get the question on the Order Paper, may I ask the Taoiseach whether the writs issued by him in a personal capacity related to matters concerning his public office? In that regard can he say how many have been issued and what progress, if any, has been made to date?
I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy but I have to point out that these questions are addressed to the Taoiseach in his public capacity and it is not therefore in order to ask supplementary questions on any actions he may have taken as a private individual. The Taoiseach has no official responsibility to the Dáil in that regard.
Precisely.
Have you that written out, Sir?
It is immaterial to you, Deputy, whether I have or not. It is a factual statement.
May I ask the Taoiseach whether the writs relate to his public performance as Taoiseach or to his performance when Minister for Finance as distinct from a purely private or family matter? Can he say what actions have been taken on foot of such matters during the past several months?
In case there is any ambiguity or doubt about this matter as to whether I am quoting or not, it is a longstanding precedent in this House that the private activities of its Members are not introduced into the House and that the Taoiseach's private affairs have nothing to do with his administration as Taoiseach.
In respect of the commitment given in the Programme for Government, may I invite the Taoiseach to say whether he proposes to update the law relating to defamation with a view to improving the position in regard to freedom of expression?
That seems to be a separate question, Deputy.
It is related, given that the Taoiseach, in regard to the public media, is trigger happy. I am sure the House would be interested to know what his public policy is in terms of freedom of the press.
I think the Deputy understands the point of view of the Chair. I have already been obliged to rule out certain questions in this regard in respect of a Member's private activities.
I have had a great deal of correspondence from your good self on this matter and it has taken some time to bring it this far. I invite the Taoiseach to avail of this opportunity to clarify in public where he stands on the matter.
Would the Taoiseach's activities in this capacity as a party politician be considered to be private or public within the meaning of his answer to the question? Second, what criteria are used in indicating to somebody in receipt of a writ from the Taoiseach that it has been issued by him in his public capacity, where he is indemnified, or in his private capacity, where he is not?
We are dealing now with the Taoiseach in respect of his public capacity only.
That is correct. I am seeking information.
The Deputy must not have been listening——
I was, closely.
Does he want me to repeat the answer?
If it pleases you to do so.
A Taoiseach or Minister does not need to be indemnified for any actions in their public capacity.
May I ask the Taoiseach therefore if this applies in cases where he may be acting in his capacity as a leader of a political party, that is, in a public but non-governmental capacity? Second, how would somebody in receipt of a writ from the Taoiseach know whether it has been issued by him in this public or private capacity?
Deputy Bruton must be well aware that it is made quite clear to somebody who chose to write about a person in their private capacity what the purpose of the writ is. In fact, if successful, it would be quite clear that the item should not have been printed in the first place.
I have to say, Sir,——
If there are any further legitimate questions to the Taoiseach in respect of his public capacity I will hear them, but I will permit no deviation into the private affairs of any individual in this House.
May I explain to the Taoiseach that my concern is for citizens in receipt of writs from the Taoiseach who may wish to know——
We have had this before, Deputy.
——whether he is acting in a public or private capacity?
We are having repetition.
Would the Taoiseach indicate whether it is made clear on the face of any writs issued by him that it is being issued by him in a private or public capacity?
In respect of any writ issued by me, it is made quite clear what its purpose is.
And not the capacity?
In my capacity also.
Was it £40,000 or £50,000?
The Deputy should not be jealous.
The Taoiseach has said that a Taoiseach does not need to be indemnified, but may I draw his attention to Question No. 2 again which asks if any departmental guidelines in respect of this matter exist in his Department?
The Deputy must not have been listening. I said the answer to both questions is in the negative.
Since he has confirmed that he has issued a number of writs, would the Taoiseach confirm whether two of those writs, which were issued following criticism of him in carrying out public policy, resulted in him obtaining £50,000 damages in one case and £25,000 in another? Did he obtain any further sums following criticism of him in carrying out public policies?
The Deputy is entering into the private and personal affairs of the Taoiseach. It was never the intention of this House to do so.
It is a nice sideline.
There is no problem and there never has been.
Does the lack of necessity for procedures to indemnify the Taoiseach apply to civil servants in his office or are there specific procedures under which civil servants are indemnified in circumstances as envisaged in the question? There have been cases of civil servants reported as seeking indemnity, Are there procedures for this?
This is an extension of the question as it refers to the Taoiseach in his public capacity.
I think the Taoiseach wants to answer me.
If the Taoiseach wishes to intervene that is his prerogative.
It is a separate question but I should like to tell Deputies that I recall occasions — I do not have the full details with me — of civil servants asking and being indemnified in certain court actions.
Have there been any occasions when politicians were indemnified?
I am not aware of any — I certainly have not — and I do not think Members should worry about what I do in my private capacity. If people choose to write the truth about me they have nothing to worry about.
Does the Taoiseach agree that it is not a question of those in the media writing the truth and having nothing to worry about? In a recent case in relation to the extraordinary fees paid to the inspectors in the beef tribunal where a fair comment was written——
The truth is out.
Does the Taoiseach accept that it is the law that prevents people from writing the truth?
Deputy Harney is out of order and she knows it.
Now we know.
"Open Government"— those are the words in the Programme for Government.
Deputy Cox tried, but it will not work.
