That is the order as I understand it, and it has operated for some time. I congratulate Deputies Andrews, Smith and Treacy on their promotions. I do not doubt they will do their utmost to fulfil the roles they have been given to the best of their abilities and in the interest of the State.
The office of Minister for Foreign Affairs is a crucial one in any Government. From the foundation of the State it has been regarded as a prestigious and senior position, requiring the attention of a capable and experienced Deputy: somebody with a cool head, sound judgment and capable of giving the energy and commitment required by the job. Since membership of the European Community in 1973 the demands on the office have increased very significantly, with a whole range of EU commitments adding to the burden of whoever holds the office.
In recent years the demands on the office have grown even more dramatically with the evolution of the situation in Northern Ireland. Additional responsibilities were placed on the Minister for Foreign Affairs under the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The Minister is a key player in the Anglo-Irish process and since the opening of all-party talks in June 1996 the jobload has grown yet further, with the situation requiring the considerable attention and the regular attendance of the Minister.
With the very welcome progress being made in Castle Buildings and the process moving into a much more intensive phase, we need a Minister for Foreign Affairs who can give the talks the undivided attention they require. David Andrews is undoubtedly a capable and experienced politician: I hope that he gives the job the energy and dynamism that it needs.
All Members will wish him well in the discharge of his onerous responsibilities. If I can offer him one piece of advice it would be that if he gives the same display of petulance and illtemper every time he hears something he does not like that he showed in the Dáil yesterday, then he will have a very difficult time as Minister for Foreign Affairs and especially in his role in the Northern talks.
The appointment of Deputy Andrews arises, of course, from the resignation of the previous Minister for Foreign Affairs, former Deputy Ray Burke, and it is necessary to respond to some of the points made by Government members and some commentators during the past 24 hours.
Mr. Burke was not driven out of office by the media or an uncaring and insensitive Opposition. He was not "hounded to resign his important position, on the basis of innuendo and unproven allegation", as the Taoiseach claimed yesterday. His resignation was the direct result of a serious error of judgment on his part, a lack of confidence in him from some of his own colleagues and by a performance of bungling ineptitude on the part of both the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste.
Through their own gross mismanagement, Deputies Ahern and Harney transformed what was a problem for them and Mr. Burke into a crisis for the Government.
Let us not lose sight of how this controversy began. Its origins lay in the disclosure that Mr. Burke had received a personal donation of £30,000 in 1989. I know of no Deputy, sitting or former, other than former Deputy Charles Haughey, who received a personal donation of anything approaching this magnitude. However, it was not just the size of the donation that was extraordinary but the circumstances in which it was received. By his own admission it was received from a man Mr. Burke had never met before, Mr. James Gogarty, who asked for no favour, large or trivial, in return for such a donation. Mr. Burke did not know how much money was paid over until after Mr. Gogarty had departed, and apparently he never inquired as to why he was the recipient of such unprecedented largesse from a person he had not met before.
When Mr. Burke made his personal statement to the Dáil on 10 September I did not believe that he had adequately answered all the questions that needed to be dealt with about the source and circumstances of this donation. It was not just the Opposition parties that were unconvinced. A subsequent IMS opinion poll showed that 70 per cent of those polled did not accept Mr. Burke's statement; 14 per cent had no opinion, and just 16 per cent accepted Mr. Burke's version of events. It was later shown that many of those in the last category were members of Fianna Fáil. An MRBI poll showed even greater numbers doubting Mr. Burke's version of events. As an Opposition party we would have been failing in our duty if we did not seek to have the matter further explored. It is the job of Opposition to question, to challenge and where the response is not satisfactory, to harry a Government. Nobody knows that better than Mr. Burke and there were few better practitioners of it when he was in Opposition than him, as I know. It is ironic that some of those who are now criticising the Opposition for "hounding Ray Burke" into resignation were equally critical of us for not pursuing him strongly enough when he made his Dáil statement on 10 September.
We sought a reasonable formula to allow the matter to be further explored in a manner which would be fair to all concerned, including Mr. Burke. Democratic Left tabled an amendment to the terms of reference to the Moriarty tribunal which would have included the Burke donation in the preliminary ‘sifting' process of the new tribunal. This would have enabled Mr. Justice Moriarty to make preliminary inquiries into the donation and decide whether it merited further examination. Under the terms of reference this could have been done in private. The Taoiseach threw the offer back in our faces.
The matter effectively rested there until Magill magazine published the text of a letter written by the man who arranged the donation, Mr. Michael Bailey, to the man who made the donation, Mr. James Gogarty, promising that he could procure planning permission and a majority vote at a full council meeting. Coincidentally, this letter was written within three days of the donation being made to Mr. Burke. This letter was apparently enough to set the alarm bells ringing and awaken the Progressive Democrats from their power-induced stupor. Without any warning or consultation with anyone in Opposition, the Taoiseach then went on radio to announce an inquiry into the planning process in north County Dublin.
There then followed an extraordinary week in which the Government fought tooth and nail to prevent Mr. Burke's donation being referred to explicitly or implicitly in the terms of reference of the new tribunal. The Whips met to try to agree terms, but the Government seemed to be in a virtual state of paralysis, changing its position virtually on the hour, with neither the Taoiseach nor the Tánaiste willing or able to deal with the matter in a decisive or authoritative manner. Such was the confusion that Opposition Whips were left to wonder if there was anyone in Government Buildings.
Last Saturday The Irish Times published a story concerning the sale of 11 passports in 1990 to wealthy Arab bankers which further undermined Mr. Burke's position. The importance of this story was not the details of the sale of passports in 1990, which had been published previously, but the disclosure that the Taoiseach had had Mr. Burke's involvement in these events investigated on no less than three occasions. It raised serious questions about the Taoiseach's confidence in Mr. Burke and about the state of the relationship between the two parties in Government.
Throughout this period, Democratic Left never once called for Ray Burke's resignation from Government. We expressed serious concern about his ability to function effectively as a Minister against the background of the controversies that were threatening to swamp him. Again we sought to deal with this situation in a way that would be fair to him. On 29 September Deputy Rabbitte suggested that rather than requiring the Minister to resign, the Government should temporarily delegate his functions to another member of Cabinet. Once again the Taoiseach threw the offer back in our faces, refusing to even consider it.
If the Taoiseach had been prepared to accept our suggestion in regard to including the Burke donation in the preliminary process of the Moriarty Tribunal or listen to our advice to delegate his functions to another Minister, then Mr. Burke might well still be a member of the Cabinet and a Member of the House. Instead, the Taoiseach displayed all the old characteristics of dithering and indecision that drive even his greatest admirers to distraction.
There are very serious questions raised about the political judgment of the Taoiseach. The former Taoiseach, Deputy Bruton, was flayed by Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats for what they claimed was his poor political judgment in the appointment of Deputy Michael Lowry to the Cabinet. Yet at the time he was appointed to Government, there was nothing to suggest that there were unanswered questions in Deputy Lowry's background.
On the other hand, when the Taoiseach appointed Mr. Burke to the most senior and sensitive portfolio of Foreign Affairs, we now know that he was aware of the controversial circumstances of the £30,000 donation in 1989 and that he had further had Mr. Burke investigated on three separate occasions over the 1990 sale of 11 passports. What does this say about the Taoiseach's judgment? Did he not realise that these issues were bound to resurface and inhibit Mr. Burke's ability to do the job? Was it appallingly poor political judgment, or was he discharging some political debt?
What of the Tánaiste? Her undignified gallop within the space of a few weeks from being one of Mr. Burke's greatest defenders to the desperate attempts over the weekend to put clear water between her party and the former Minister represented one of the most spectacular political retreats in recent Irish politics. Does Deputy Harney stand over her comments on 7 August that she had total faith in the judgment of the Taoiseach on Fianna Fáil members of the Cabinet? Why did the Tánaiste allow her spokesmen to claim over the weekend that she had no knowledge of the investigation carried out by the Taoiseach into the passport affair, when this was not the case?
Ray Burke did the correct thing in resigning from his position as Minister for Foreign Affairs. I do not understand why he felt compelled to resign from the Dáil and hope that in the fullness of time, he will give us the full story which the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste do not seem intent on doing.