Vol. 458 No. 1
2 Mr. O'Donoghue asked the Minister for Justice whether the Garda officers assigned to the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications have ever reported observing or suspecting that the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications was under surveillance. [16613/95]
46 Miss Coughlan asked the Minister for Justice whether the Garda officers assigned to the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications have ever reported observing or suspecting that the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications was under surveillance. [16535/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 46 together.
I am informed by the Garda authorities that no report was made to their superintendent by the Garda drivers in question of surveillance on the Minister for Transport, Enegry and Communications.
Inasmuch as the letters were bogus, the allegations in relation to surveillance were bogus as well. The Minister of State should answer the House and state categorically that this affair all along was a McCarthyite smear on Fianna Fáil which went badly wrong. Does he now accept there was never any surveillance and that the allegations of criminal activity made by the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications should be withdrawn forthwith, in so far as he received an apology from RTE?
I understand the necessity for the Deputy to make an impact, since his Árd Fheis is at the weekend.
Do not be patronising.
Presumably phrases like "McCarthyite smear" have a particular relevance to that. The Deputy will know this matter has been raised in the House, in a committee of this House and in public almost ad nauseam over the past few weeks. He and other Members interested in this matter have received replies to the questions he now asks. The Deputy asked a specific question and I have gave him a specific answer. If he wanted to ask other questions he should have included them in the question he tabled. The Minister, Deputy Lowry, did not at any stage make allegations about criminal activity or corruption.
Is the Minister of State saying the existence of a cosy cartel in the semi-State sector, ripping off the lion's share of the business, would not constitute a criminal offence? It would be better for the Minister and for the integrity of the House if he stated that not only were the letters bogus but that the allegations were also bogus and politically motivated.
The questions deal with surveillance and the Deputy is bringing in extraneous matter.
I agree, Sir. I also note from the Deputy's comments that he appears to accept that there was a cosy cartel operating, the point made by Minister Lowry. His reference was to a cosy cartel, he substantiated those charges and I am glad the Deputy is beginning to accept that.
I am not sure over whose eyes the Minister is trying to pull the wool, but he will not pull it over mine. The Minister is well aware that there was not a cosy cartel getting the lion's share of the business in the semi-State sector and a State task force and a firm of accountants confirmed that. Is the Minister's accusation of surveillance based only on the bogus letters?
In reply to the Deputy's first point, Minister Lowry's claim that a cosy cartel was operating in the semi-State sector has been substantiated by him and the Deputy is well aware of that. I have already responded to the Deputy's second question.
I asked the Minister of State if the allegation of surveillance by the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications was based only on the bogus letters and I am entitled to a specific reply.
I cannot compel Ministers to state what a Deputy wishes to say in the House or to compel them to speak if they do not wish.
My responsibility to the House does not extend to saying words the Deputy would like to put in my mouth.
