Gay Mitchell
Question:38 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the circumstances surrounding the recent nomination of an Irish consul to Pakistan. [21689/99]
Priority Questions. - Departmental Appointments.
Honorary consuls are appointed in places where the number of Irish citizens requiring consular assistance or protection and/or prospects for the development of economic relations warrants. Their services are particularly valuable in countries such as Pakistan where there is no resident Irish embassy. Persons appointed honorary consul must be well established professional or business people with a knowledge of Ireland who have good contacts in political, administrative and business circles in the country concerned as well as centrally located premises and other facilities suitable for use as a consulate. Appointments are subject to the approval of the Government of the other country and are made only after careful consideration of the suitability of the appointees.
The honorary consul in Karachi, appointed in 1988, resigned in May 1998 and the position has been vacant since then. Each person considered for appointment was interviewed by the Irish Ambassador to Pakistan, who lives in Tehran. Some 14 possible appointees in Pakistan, two of them Irish citizens, have been considered. As is normal for appointments of this kind, I received representations from interested persons in Pakistan and in Ireland supporting one or other of those under consideration. Of the two persons considered by the Ambassador and the Department of Foreign Affairs as being the most suitable for appointment, I decided on the one who, in my view, was the better and asked the Ambassador to Pakistan to seek the approval of the Pakistani authorities for his appointment. The formal request was presented to them early in 1999.
Will the Minister confirm that among the reasons for the removal of the previous Irish consul to Pakistan, who took a legal case and whose term of office may well have been terminated during the term of the last Government, although the process commenced before that, was that he had made complaints about Indus Bank and what he considered its unethical business behaviour? Given the apparent connection between this bank and a Member of this House, did the Minister's Department investigate that connection when that Deputy came to nominate a successor, who was conveniently accepted by the Minister?
As the Deputy is aware, the previous incumbent resigned and I believe that was one of the undertakings in the settlement reached between the Department of Foreign Affairs and the individual concerned. As far as the current nominee is concerned, two names were proposed by the Ambassador to Pakistan, as I pointed out to Deputy De Rossa, arising out of 14 names. As between the two, the Ambassador had a preference for the person other than the person I nominated. It is fair to say that at all times arising from questions from the media and elsewhere I have been open, transparent and accountable as far as this appointment is concerned. If the Deputy has any difficulties in that regard, I would be prepared to do my best to help him with whatever answers he may seek.
Arising from his reply, if 14 persons applied for this job and two names were sent to the Minister and he chose the second on the list rather than the first, is the Minister telling the House that it is coincidental that the person was appointed after lobbying from Deputy Ellis and that was not relevant? Will the Minister also say why his Department gratuitously leaked the name of the Tánaiste's programme manager as the person supporting the other candidate because that is exactly what happened?
I strongly deny the suggestion that the Department of Foreign Affairs leaked the name of the Tánaiste's special adviser. The first time I saw that, as the Deputy properly points out, was in the print media. It certainly did not emanate from the Department of Foreign Affairs to my certain knowledge because this an issue about I have been concerned.
The Minister is embarrassing his Minister of State.
I beg your pardon?
The Minister is embarrassing his Minister of State.
I am not embarrassing my Minister of State who is an able and capable person. If the Deputy has any questions to ask her, he should put them to her. To give the Deputy a soupcon of the information put to me on the two individuals concerned – and I admit Deputy Ellis made a representation on behalf of the individual I propose to appoint, Mr. Ahsan. Commenting on Mr. Ahsan, the Irish Ambassador to Pakistan said: “He is socially comfortable and comes across as someone who is used to dealing with a variety of people and has wide experience. The second individual, Mr. Gilani, confirmed the impression he had given on the first occasion I met him of being socially at ease, open and direct and a solid and reliable person”. That was the opinion among a number of views expressed by the Ambassador to Pakistan, Thomas D. Lyons. Based on that and other information, I made my choice. The matter now rests with the Pakistani authorities for the time being and I await the outcome of their decision with great patience and anticipation.
Given that the original consul was dismissed in part because of his complaints about Indus Bank and that he will be replaced with a nominee of a director of Indus Bank, does the Minister consider that this matter should be put before the foreign affairs committee for examination because it seems rather peculiar and coincidental that—
We must conclude on this question.
—of 14 nominees only one name came forward, and it was not that of the fist person recommended? Was the Minister trying to put one over on the Progressive Democrats? I cannot make it out.
I came to the House and have opened myself to the Deputy's examination. The question was asked and I am answering it in an open, fair and reasonable manner. It is not my intention to send the matter to the foreign affairs committee. It is my decision, I stick by it and I take the consequence of it as an elected representative.
That concludes Priority Questions.