It is proposed to take No. 7, the motion re the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill, 1996, and, subject to the agreement of No. 7, No. 2, the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill, 1996, Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 7 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' Business which shall be No. 21 — Prosecution of Offences and Punishment of Crimes Bill, 1996, Second Stage (Resumed) shall take place today at 6.15 p.m. and the proceedings on the Second Stage thereof shall adjourn at 8.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
There are two matters to be put to the House. First, is it agreed that No. 7 shall be decided without debate?
In the light of the introduction of the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill, 1996, may I again ask the Taoiseach to state the position of the Fianna Fáil Misuse of Drugs Bill, 1996, which the Government accepted on Second Stage?
I believe it is before a select committee of the House.
Does it take procedence over the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill now before the House?
That is a matter for the committee, but obviously Government business takes precedence in Government time.
Question put and agreed to.
Are the arrangements for Private Members' Business agreed? Agreed.
The House will debate the Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Bill today. On 9 November, the day after the Urlingford drugs consignment find, I asked that the Drug Trafficking Bill be brought forward as I raised the fact that nobody had been apprehended at the location of the drugs find in Urlingford. Much has been written about that outside this House. The Taoiseach made light of my remarks on that occasion saying: "Obviously, one would not expect to find the drug barons in the lorry. That they were not apprehended on the spot should not warrant the significance Deputy Ahern attaches to it". I questioned the Taoiseach about this matter because of something that was made known to the Fianna Fáil office. The identity of the driver of the lorry is a matter of great significance and the Taoiseach should take the opportunity of clarifying this matter, if not now, tomorrow. I would remind the Taoiseach also of what was said on the Adjournment on 9 December and what was subsequently said by Deputy John O'Donoghue and the Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, on 14 December. I do not wish to say any more but will the Taoiseach indicate that he will look at the matter and correct the record of the House?
The matter will be debated this evening.
I too wish to express my concern about this matter. Our spokesperson, Deputy O'Donnell, will deal with it more fully during the debate to follow. The public were misled by this House and the Taoiseach, the Minister of Justice and the Minister of State at the Department of Justice should clarify the matter.
I am concerned that those involved in drugs should be apprehended but that does not mean that anyone should break the law or that the public should be misled. This is a serious matter and I want to deal with it as sensitively as possible. There are sensitivities involved but that does not mean that the House should not be fully informed on the matters concerned. Given that the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice chose to speak about the matter on 9 December and subsequently, they should use the opportunity to correct the record.
This is a serious matter but perhaps the Order of Business is not the appropriate place to raise it. The Taoiseach appears to wish to intervene.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I think you are right and I do not think this matter is appropriate on the Order of Business.
I commented at the time on question raised without notice. The question of apprehending people who are involved in drug trafficking is a matter of day to day responsibility for the Garda Commissioner and it is not possible or appropriate for the Minister for Justice — or for me on the Order of Business without notice — to be responsible for answering specific questions about specific Garda operations. They are properly a matter for the independent decision and supervision of the Garda Commissioner. It is not in the best interests of law enforcement that both Opposition parties should attempt to introduce political considerations into the day to day operation of the Garda Síochána.
The Taoiseach will get the bouquets.
Sir, I have given in a most orderly way an indication to the Taoiseach of the matter we are raising without being too precise or going into operational matters. I am very clear on some of the things that happened to this particular consignment and I do not wish to go into detail because the Taoiseach is right in saying they are confidential. What happened at Urlingford and thereafter is a matter for this House. Following on from information which I did not know was right or wrong, I asked questions and I believed what the Taoiseach told me but subsequently found out differently. I am giving the Taoiseach an opportunity to again answer the question. What happened afterwards with the publicity of the seizure and the photocall opportunity for the Minister for Justice is in the political domain. I am asking that the Official Report in so far as it relates to me and the Fianna Fáil Justice spokesperson, be set straight.
The Deputy's party spokesperson on Justice, Deputy O'Donoghue, was offered and accepted a confidential briefing on this matter on Saturday. If there was any information — to which the Deputy now alludes — Deputy O'Donoghue had an adequate opportunity to pass it on when he accepted the offer of a confidential briefing at the request of the Minister for Justice. There was adequate opportunity there for the Opposition parties' concerns to be dealt with in the normal way without the necessity of recourse to vague inferences and dark hints of the kind in which the Deputy is engaged.
As far as my answers to questions are concerned, I expressed a general opinion that one would not expect to find in normal circumstances drug barons in the cab of a lorry that was conveying concealed drugs.
Would they contract it out?
I believe that is a reasonable and normal inference to draw. I had no specific knowledge of the particular Garda operation in this case.
The Taoiseach should have had.
I have confidence, as I believe the Deputies who were offered confidential briefing on the matter should also have confidence, in the competence of the Garda Síochána to conduct criminal investigations under the direction of the Garda Commissioner on a day to day basis. I do not believe it is particularly useful or in the interest of law enforcement that the Opposition parties should attempt to raise the matter in this way, particularly in view of the fact that they were offered, and accepted, confidential briefing on this matter.
The Taoiseach's response is unhelpful. We received a confidential briefing but the dogs on the streets had given us the information already. Having said that, it was a confidential briefing.
We will not use any information we got in that confidential briefing. The question I asked the Taoiseach that day was about Urlingford. I am not aware that there was anything confidential about what happened at Urlingford, how the truck got there, who drove the truck there and how it got away from Urlingford. That is what I would like the Taoiseach to clarify. That was the question I asked the Taoiseach on the morning of 9 November.
I was asked, without notice, on the Order of Business about this matter and I expressed a general opinion that one would not normally find drug barons in the cab of a truck that was conveying drugs. I believe that is a reasonable statement.
The Taoiseach would not expect——
Deputy Cowen, please desist.
I made that statement without any particular knowledge of the operation because it is not my day to day responsibility to be involved in or informed of day to day Garda operations.
Then the Taoiseach misled the House.
If the Deputy wishes to obtain or convey information, channels are available to him. If further information is sought that can be provided to him. If Deputy O'Donoghue failed to make the necessary inquiries when he had the confidential briefing that can also be rectified. If he wishes to table any further questions they will be answered in the normal way. I would ask Deputies to bear in mind again that the day to day management of Garda operations is a matter not for me, on the Order of Business without notice, nor for the Minister for Justice but for the Garda Commissioner. That is something that has been established practice in this House since the Garda Síochána was founded shortly after the foundation of the State. I see no particular advantage in changing that to a situation where the Taoiseach or the Minister for Justice is expected, on a day to day basis, to be accountable without notice for answering questions about day to day Garda operations. That would be a ludicrous situation and would not have proper accountability in regard to law enforcement.
This happens every day.
We are on the Order of Business. There can be no debate on this matter now. There are many ways of raising it under our Standing Orders. I will hear no further reference to the matter.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I will hear no further reference to the matter. I have advised Deputies how to proceed and they shall proceed in accordance with the Orders of the House.
Since my name was mentioned by the Taoiseach I would like the opportunity——
I am sorry, Deputy O'Donoghue. If there is no other matter relevant to the Order of Business I propose to proceed to the business of the House.
On a point of order, I accept——
The Chair is on his feet. I will hear no point of order when I am dealing with disorder.
The only question I have is whether or not correct information was given to this House on 9 November and 14 December 1995.
I am proceeding now. Deputy O'Donoghue, you must find another way of raising this matter. You heard me. I am proceeding to item No. 7.