It is proposed to take No. 4. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the following arrangements shall apply in relation to the resumed debate at No. 4: (i) the speech of the main spokesperson for the Fianna Fáil Party and the Progressive Democrats Party, who shall be called upon to contribute to the debate first, shall not exceed 40 minutes in each case; (ii) the speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 30 minutes in each case; and (iii) Members may share time.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal relating to item No. 4 satisfactory?
No, it is not agreed. The Fianna Fáil Party will not agree to the Order of Business until we get an assurance from the Taoiseach on a number of issues. First, we would like the Taoiseach to clarify whether the long-standing practice that Ministers of State do not receive budgetary data until the budget is released in the House has been breached. We would also like to know, in view of the Government procedural instructions, Rule 19, which provides that no member of the Government or other person attending a meeting should divulge information about Government meetings without specific authority, who gave specific authority to the Minister of State, Deputy Hogan, to divulge information. What is the Attorney General's advice to the Taoiseach on the leaks——
It must be clear to the Deputy and the House that we cannot debate this matter now. I have indicated to the House how we should proceed. We shall hear a statement on the matter shortly and the House may decide how to proceed thereafter.
A Cheann Comhairle——
This matter cannot be debated now. I have indicated again and again that if serious charges are to be made against a Member of the House there are procedures for pursuing the matter by way of substantive motion. That is the way to proceed if Members feel strongly about this matter, but a debate on the Order of Business is out of the question.
I am not seeking a debate. We sent a letter to the Taoiseach last night, to which he replied. We will try to avoid putting down a substantive motion but if that is the only way to get information we will follow that course. We made what we thought was a very reasonable request in the circumstances, because we are dealing with an issue that has arisen for the first time in the history of the State——
The Deputy is continuing to make a speech on the matter.
We simply asked for a question and answer session on the statement, which seems very reasonable. Will the Taoiseach grant that request?
We should have openness and transparency.
Any questions tabled on this matter that are judged to be in order, whether they be Private Notice Questions or ordinary questions, will be answered in full. On the question raised by Deputy Ahern about Ministers of State having access to information concerning the budget, the position is different in this case. It has been known that the Minister of State, Deputy Hogan, is a member of the budgetary and economic sub-committee of the Cabinet and, of course, he had access to budgetary information in that context. There has been no concealment at any time of those facts.
Did the Taoiseach take advice on that?
The question of divulging information will be dealt with by Deputy Hogan in his personal statement and if that statement is not satisfactory questions may be put in the normal way by the Opposition. If such questions are judged to be in order they will be answered fully on behalf of the Government.
On the question of the Attorney General's advice being taken, any relevant advice will be taken. I want to make it absolutely clear that it is my intention that there will be full accountability to the House in this matter. The matter is a serious one and the House is entitled to full accountability by all those involved. I have already apologised to the House on behalf of the Government for what occurred, but I fully understand that Members wish to have more information on the matter and they are entitled to that. It is the intention of Deputy Hogan and the Government that that information will be provided in whatever way is in order.
It is appropriate in the first instance, in view of the fact that Deputy Hogan has been the subject of obvious and foreseeable criticism, that he should be afforded the opportunity to make a personal statement. Any Member who wishes to table further questions arising from that will be entitled to full answers and will get them.
We will not get them today.
Apart from the fact that I have already clearly indicated my apologies on behalf of the Government for what has occurred, I would point out that there was no concealment on the face of the press statement issued by Deputy Hogan, either of its time of issue or of its source. This was quite transparent on the face of the document.
(Interruptions.)
I wish to draw a clear distinction between that occurrence and the issue of unattributable and under-hand leaks of budgetary information, which is a separate matter.
A transparent leak.
I would ask Deputy Ahern and Members generally not to pursue this matter now. In the interest of natural justice this House should await the personal explanation of the Minister of State before proceeding further. I will hear no more on the matter now.
In the interests of openness and transparency——
I will hear no more on this subject now.
Where is the Minister of State?
May I ask the Taoiseach a question?
On a point of order——
I would ask Members not to raise spurious points of order to circumvent my ruling on this matter. It will do no good.
Is the Minister of State down a mine shaft?
The Taoiseach indicated that the Government is prepared to allow the Minister of State, Deputy Hogan, come in and make a personal statement.
I am not prepared to hear any more on this matter.
Will he request the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy Rossa, to make a personal statement about the way in which he leaked the social welfare details to the Irish Press?
If there is nothing further on the Order of Business I am requesting Deputy Bertie Ahern to resume the debate on the budget.
Will anyone else come in to make a statement?
Does the House agree to the arrangements in regard to item No. 4?
No.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Item No. 4 be agreed to".
The Dáil divided: Tá, 76; Níl, 62.
Tá
- Ahearn, Theresa.
- Barrett, Seán.
- Barry, Peter.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bhamjee, Moosajee.
- Boylan, Andrew.
- Bradford, Paul.
- Bree, Declan.
- Broughan, Tommy.
- Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
- Bruton, John.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Eric.
- Carey, Donal.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Connor, John.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coveney, Hugh.
- Crawford, Seymour.
- Creed, Michael.
- Crowley, Frank.
- Currie, Austin.
- Deasy, Austin.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Doyle, Avril.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Finucane, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Eithne.
- Fitzgerald, Frances.
- Flaherty, Mary.
- Flanagan, Charles.
- Foxe, Tom.
- Gallagher, Pat.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Harte, Paddy.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Lowry, Michael.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McDowell, Derek.
- McGahon, Brendan.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McManus, Liz.
- Mitchell, Gay.
- Mitchell, Jim.
- Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nealon, Ted.
- Noonan, Michael. (Limerick East).
- O'Keeffe, Jim.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Owen, Nora.
- Pattison, Séamus.
- Penrose, William.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, John.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Shatter, Alan.
- Sheehan, P.J.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Timmins, Godfrey.
- Upton, Pat.
- Walsh, Eamon.
- Yates, Ivan.
Níl
- Ahern, Bertie.
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, David.
- Brennan, Matt.
- Brennan, Séamus.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Davern, Noel.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Ellis, John.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Hanlon, Rory.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- O'Keeffe, Ned.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Keogh, Helen.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Michael P.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- Martin, Micheál.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McDowell, Michael.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- Power, Seán.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Wallace, Mary.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Barrett and Ferris; Níl, Deputies D. Ahern and O'Donnell.
Question declared carried.
Will the Taoiseach or the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, make a statement to the House before the Minister of State, Deputy Hogan, makes his statement to clarify the position on the leaks about the budget on Tuesday night? This is a serious matter and the House should be given an explanation by the Taoiseach, the Minister for Social Welfare or both.
I have advised Deputies on how to proceed in this matter.
Will the Taoiseach outline the position?
The House is being treated with contempt.