I propose to answer Questions Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6 together.
I am informed by the Attorney General that immediately upon his being made aware on 7 May last, by the solicitor to the Beef Tribunal on behalf of the Chairman of the tribunal, that copies of certain papers, which had been made available to the tribunal by the then Department of Industry and Commerce, had come into the possession of persons not parties to the inquiry, he inquired into the matter. The correspondence on the matter was initated on behalf of the Chairman on a private and confidential basis and was responded to by the Attorney General on the same basis.
In the course of the Attorney General's inquiry, he directed the solicitor instructing the State's legal team, who is a member of his staff, to make certain inquiries on his behalf.
The Attorney General informs me that it has not proved possible to ascertain the circumstances in which the papers came into the possession of the newspaper referred to. I regret that this is so because I deplore the disclosure of official documents through any channels other than authorised ones.
In case there is any misunderstanding about the nature of these documents, I wish to make it clear to the House and to the public that, on the advice of the State's legal team, they had been cleared by the then Minister for Industry and Commerce to the tribunal for release by it to all the parties to the inquiry should the tribunal see fit.
The unauthorised publication, although very regrettable, did not prejudice any interest of the State. Were the State to seek to prevent publication of the documents it would have had to show that its interest would be prejudiced by such publication. This it could not do.
