Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 22 Feb 1996

Vol. 462 No. 1

Written Answers. - Beef Tribunal Fees.

Michael Woods

Question:

117 Dr. Woods asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he has satisfied himself that no conflict of interest has arisen for the Attorney General in advising the Government in relation to its approach to the claim against the State by the Goodman Group for £9 million in fees. [3094/96]

Michael Woods

Question:

118 Dr. Woods asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry whether a substantial part of the £9 million costs claimed against the State by the Goodman Group arising out of the Beef Tribunal is fees claimed by the Attorney General for acting for the Goodman Group; and the amount of this bill to be paid to the Attorney General. [3095/96]

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry (Mr. Yates)

I propose to take Question Nos. 117 and 118 together.

In regard to the Attorney General's previous personal involvement in the case, I would refer the Deputy to the reply by the Taoiseach to Question No. 1 on 25 January 1995 and to the Taoiseach's statement to the Dáil on 30 May 1995.

The Attorney General has not advised the Government in relation to its approach to the claim against the State by the Goodman Group, as suggested. All advices given in relation to the Goodman Group's costs and expenses have been given — without reference to the Attorney General — by a member of his office, the Chief State Solicitor's Office and by counsel. The Attorney General has from the beginning put in place procedures to deal with conflict of interest cases such as this.

The costs now sought by Goodman/Goodman International do include the costs incurred by them in respect of discharging fees to counsel — including the present Attorney General — but as far as the Attorney General is concerned his fees have been paid and the only persons who have an interest in the matter are his clients.