Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2001

Vol. 533 No. 4

Order of Business.

The Taoiseach

The Order of Business for today shall be as follows: No. 20, motion re Freedom of Information Act, 1997 (Prescribed Bodies) Regulations, 2001; No. 21, motion re Freedom of Information Act, 1997 (Prescribed Bodies) (No. 2) Regulations, 2001; No. 22, motion re Freedom of Information Act, 1997 (Prescribed Bodies) (No. 3) Regulations, 2001; No. 6, ACC Bank Bill, 2001 – Order for Second Stage and Second Stage; No. 46, Teaching Council Bill, 2000 – Order for Report and Report and Final Stages and No. 47, Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2000 [Seanad] – Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage.

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and that business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m.; Nos. 20, 21 and 22 shall be moved together and decided without debate by one question which shall be put from the Chair and the Second Stage of No. 6 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. Private Members' business shall be No. 110, motion re Electricity Supply (Resumed) to conclude at 8.30 p.m.

An Ceann Comhairle

There are three proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed?

Mr. Noonan

I oppose the Order of Business. Fine Gael is seriously concerned about the handling of the Sinnott case in the Supreme Court. Another issue also arises in that the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, inadvertently misled the House by stating that all damages would be paid to Jamie and Mrs. Sinnott. This subsequently transpired to be incorrect. There is provision for the Minister, and there are precedents for Ministers who inadvertently mislead the House, to come into the House to set the record straight.

I wish the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, to correct the record in accordance with precedent. Even at this late stage there is merit in the State dropping the case and paying the full damages agreed in the High Court to Jamie and Mrs. Sinnott.

An Ceann Comhairle

I remind Deputies that the proposal before the House concerns the late sitting and has nothing to do with the matter referred to by Deputy Noonan.

Mr. Quinn

With respect, a Cheann Comhairle, the proposal before the House is that we agree to the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle

No. The proposal before the House is to agree to the late sitting.

Mr. Quinn

The late sitting is one item on the Order of Business.

An Ceann Comhairle

The proposal concerns the late sitting and nothing else.

Mr. Quinn

We will agree to the late sitting if the Taoiseach will allow time for debate on motion 128 or 129 on the Order Paper for which there is majority support in the House, including Deputy McGennis in the Taoiseach's party, and which would direct the Executive not to proceed with the oppressive appeal to the Supreme Court against Jamie Sinnott and his family.

Mr. M. Ahern

The Deputy knows that is not true.

Mr. Quinn

It is true. Will the Taoiseach explain to the House why he has allowed the Minister for Education and Science to mislead the House and why that misleading statement remains on the record of the House uncorrected? What is the Taoiseach going to do about this oppressive action against the Sinnott family which is appalling the entire nation?

We have had one day of reports of the court's proceedings. Will the Taoiseach do us the courtesy of outlining the Government's attitude to the House? When will the Minister for Education and Science correct the misleading statements which stand on the record of the House?

Mr. Sargent

I support the Labour Party and Fine Gael in seeking to ensure that the Jamie Sinnott case is dropped.

Mr. Briscoe

What is new?

Mr. Sargent

The late sitting is not late enough given the Sinnott case and the fact that the Local Government Bill seems to have gone to ground even though the Minister for the Environment and Local Government seems to think it is fundamental in principle to enact the Bill. Will the Taoiseach reassure the House that the Local Government Bill is still alive and kicking and capable of seeing the light of day and that the phantom government of the four Independents will not hold sway when the Government claims this is important legislation?

The Taoiseach

Last week I referred to the fact that the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, gave a detailed account on 20 March of what he previously said and the reasons for it. The Supreme Court is sitting today to consider the Sinnott case. The Cheann Comhairle and the House will know it would be inappropriate for me to make any comment which would appear to attempt to influence the outcome of a hearing of the Supreme Court.

Mr. Creed

The Taoiseach could correct the record of the House. That is not trial by jury.

Mr. D. Ahern

It is not trial by Dáil.

The Taoiseach

The Minister addressed that issue on 20 March.

Mr. Creed

There is a precedent for the Minister to correct the record.

The Taoiseach

For the first time seven Supreme Court judges are on the Bench to hear the case. The matter is of considerable constitutional importance so it will not be decided here today. The legal system does not permit points of law to be decided in the abstract. The important issues raised in the Sinnott case cannot be appealed without appealing the outcome of the case. Everyone in this House who knows anything about the law, and there are quite a few, knows that to be the case.

The payment of £157,000 has been made, bringing the total payments, to date, to Jamie Sinnott and his mother, Kathryn Sinnott, to £215,000. Whatever happens in the Supreme Court, none of these awards will be recovered by the State. Legal costs in the High Court and the Supreme Court will be paid by the State. The case, which is the subject matter of much publicity, is by no means the only such claim being brought, or likely to be brought, against the State. It is important, therefore, that the State deals even-handedly and properly with all such claims on the basis of their proper constitutional and legal foundations. I have no doubt that after the Supreme Court's judgment we will know how we are to follow these cases that were not clear following the High Court's ruling. However, we must await the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing.

Question put: "That the late sitting be agreed to".

Tá

Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.

Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán. Ellis, John.

Tá–continued

Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John J.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.

Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Barnes, Monica.Barrett, Seán.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis J.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas P.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Clune, Deirdre.Connaughton, Paul.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.Deenihan, Jimmy.Dukes, Alan.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Farrelly, John.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Hayes, Brian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Hogan, Philip.

Howlin, Brendan.Kenny, Enda.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Spring, Dick.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Bradford and Stagg.

Question declared carried.

An Ceann Comhairle

Are the proposals for dealing with Nos. 20, 21 and 22 agreed?

Mr. Quinn

No. I believe a majority of Members of the House are not satisfied with the explanation given by the Taoiseach in respect of the Sinnott family. He should reconsider the position. It is not true to say that the Government is powerless because a court case has commenced. The Government initiated that court case and is at liberty, at any stage, to cancel further proceedings. In light of the fact that a clear majority of Members, including many of his party's backbenchers, are decidedly unhappy with the action being taken by the Government, the Taoiseach should indicate that he is prepared to give instructions to withdraw the proceedings in this case and, as a matter of courtesy to the House, that he will direct the Minister for Education and Science to come before us to correct the record. As it stands, that record is clearly misleading.

An Ceann Comhairle

I remind the Deputy that the proposals before the House relate to the taking of motions on the Freedom of Information Act and that these are not relevant to the matter to which he refers.

Mr. Quinn

If we had been given accurate information, they would be relevant to it.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputies should speak to the motion before the House and not attempt to deal with a matter which is not relevant to that motion.

Mr. Noonan

We are opposing this motion because the Minister for Education and Science misled the House and he should come before us to correct the record. There are several precedents for his doing so. In addition, I believe the Government is wrong in continuing to pursue the Sinnott family. The Taoiseach informed the House that it is already Government policy to ensure that people of all ages can avail of life-long education. In that context, there is no policy issue to be adjudicated. The Taoiseach should drop the case, mend his fences and direct the Minister to come before the House to make a personal statement correcting the record of the House.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Noonan is totally incorrect. There are clear policy issues involved in the Jamie Sinnott case. In his opening statement yesterday, the State's senior counsel made the Government position very clear. There are other cases that have a bearing on this matter and the policy position for the future will have to be clarified.

Mr. Dukes

The Government could make proper policy.

Ms Fitzgerald

Those policies need services.

Mr. Dukes

Has the Government got a policy?

The Taoiseach

That is what is before the seven members of the Supreme Court today, and not before the Members of this House.

Question, "That the proposals for dealing with items 20, 21 and 22 be agreed" put and declared carried.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the proposals for dealing with No. 6 agreed? Agreed.

I will now take leaders questions. I call Deputy Noonan.

Mr. Noonan

Is the Taoiseach aware that following his conversation with Mr. Blair in Stock holm on the foot and mouth disease outbreak, there is a view that he unfairly reprimanded the Northern Ireland authorities and gave offence to both officials and politicians, including the Minister for Agriculture, Ms Rodgers MLA, who is dealing with the crisis in the North? Does he realise that agriculture in Northern Ireland is a devolved function and is not within the competence of the British Prime Minister?

Critical remarks about practices in Northern Ireland are not critical of Mr. Blair, they are critical of Ms Rodgers MLA. Will the Taoiseach arrange a ministerial conference of agriculture Ministers, north and south, so that the problem can be dealt with on an all-Ireland basis? Any damage that has been done to the relationship between the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and Ms Rodgers MLA can then be repaired at the earliest possible date.

Mr. Quinn

Will the Taoiseach join me in welcoming the statement issued by the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. Trimble MLA, when he welcomed the fact that the European Commission had given regional status to Northern Ireland? Does he also agree that this was a practical manifestation from the Unionist community of the benefits of co-operating on an all-Ireland basis on matters of mutual concern?

The Taoiseach

There are separate issues involved. One issue related to information received from truckers travelling through ports in Northern Ireland. The issue of mats was central. Some mats were useful in dealing with cars but not with trucks and the truckers made this point clear for several days. We did not raise this with the Northern Ireland authorities until the point was strongly made by trucking groups. We then relayed their concerns to the authorities there. Ms Rodgers MLA is doing an excellent job in Northern Ireland and is being seen to do so, but we did raise those concerns.

Mrs. Owen

That is not the way it comes across.

The Taoiseach

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, has had several meetings and conversations with Ms Rodgers MLA to clarify matters.

The ports in Britain are a separate concern. Our position is that not all of these ports had visible foot and mouth disease security measures in place. Mats were sometimes deficient and there were requests for sprays in some cases. A list of ports, provided to me by the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, was passed over to the British authorities last week detailing areas of concern.

We are pleased that the Northern Ireland authorities followed the same procedure as Ireland with European Commission officials and with the EU veterinary committee. We are pleased that Northern Ireland has now also got free status. We are also pleased with the arrangements that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, and Ms Rodgers MLA have made to extend the exclusion area south and north of the Border. The expert group believes that is an essential matter and we are pleased with the co-operation on all sides.

We all have a major job to do in dealing with problems arising from past practices. We need excellent co-operation to deal with the practices of smuggling and other issues. Almost the entire criminal investigation section of the Garda is dealing with this issue in the Border region.

Mr. Noonan

Does the Taoiseach appreciate that by raising the issue of the Northern Ireland ports with Mr. Blair he gave the impression that he did not know that agriculture was a fully devolved function in Northern Ireland? Does he understand that raising this issue was taken as criticism of Ms Rodgers MLA in particular, because the Taoiseach went to the British Prime Minister to complain of her? Does the Taoiseach realise that by doing this he cut a stick that could be used by Ms Rodgers' political opponents to beat her in debate in Northern Ireland? Does the Taoiseach realise that he jeopardised the Northern Ireland initiative to get regional status from the EU? Will the Taoiseach apologise for the difficulties created?

The Taoiseach

Not one of the Deputy's points is correct.

Mr. Dukes

The Taoiseach should ask Deputy Walsh.

Mrs. Owen

Deputy Noonan is correct. Ms Rodgers MLA made a public statement.

An Ceann Comhairle

These are leaders questions. There can only be one leader, Deputy Dukes.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy's party has had three leaders recently.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Belton

What about Deputy Walsh?

Mr. Quinn

In view of the continued concern about foot and mouth disease can the Taoiseach give a categorical assurance that all sheep that crossed the border from the Carlisle-Meigh consignment have been traced, counted and safely destroyed?

Mr. Noonan

Can the Taoiseach explain why there was not a Garda investigation following the revelations of sheep smuggling on RTE two years ago? Can he further explain why on two occasions the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, told the House that smuggling was not occurring? He told the House that the problem had been resolved through the Revenue Commissioners. Now we find that a Garda investigation was undertaken last week. The Minister now explains sheep smuggling on the basis that bandit activity continues as part of the culture and tradition of the Border counties. We need a statement on this as the matter is not clear. Are the gardaí continuing to investigate?

Mr. Belton

There should not be any smuggling.

The Taoiseach

To reply to Deputy Quinn's question, to the best of our knowledge, and the ability of the authorities to visit the various farms related to that delivery, it took some weeks to find the information on the whereabouts of animals, as Members will know from the Minister's information to the House. Intelligence was obtained by the Garda from members of the public and Garda efforts centred on tracking that consignment. I am not certain that all animals have been traced. I am not prepared to trust the information of those involved in such smuggling. It shows just what can happen as a result of one truckload of sheep. At least ten locations, perhaps more, were involved in that but all the information that the gardaí discovered has been dealt with and all the surveillance and the necessary slaughtering and testing in the surrounding locations have been done. I hope the full information was given but I am not certain.

On the other matters, I cannot say off the top of my head what a Minister did or did not say about any particular case but what I know is that for as long as he has been a Minister Deputy Walsh has been adamant that we will get to a position where we will have full tagging and traceability. He worked diligently to achieve that and has finally succeeded.

Mr. Dukes

It took the foot and mouth disease crisis.

Mr. Finucane

He has been a Minister for ten years.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

The Taoiseach

Unfortunately, that was not done over the years but he has now got to that position. I do not know if anyone in this House ever believed that smuggling was not taking place. Everyone always knew there was a level of smuggling going on but what people have learned in recent times is the extent of that, which is now a problem that has to be dealt with for the future.

Mr. Quinn

I am somewhat alarmed that after so many days following the outbreak of foot and mouth disease here, the Taoiseach is hanging on hope – I trust I quote his words accurately – that all of the potentially infected and infectious animals have been traced, counted and destroyed. That is an extraordinary admission when one thinks of the terrible damage foot and mouth disease is doing to the rest of the Irish economy. All of the Members of this House will have been circulated, on behalf of the tourism sector, with the information that up to £33 million and 1,315 jobs have been lost, with a further 20,000 jobs expected to be lost. Can the Taoiseach give the House a categorical assurance that the Government will vigorously pursue systems to ensure that every sheep is properly tagged and anybody suspected of engaging in smuggling will have the full rigours of the law brought to bear upon them, including the application of the Criminal Assets Bureau which has been so successful in other areas of criminal activity in this Republic?

The Taoiseach

I agree with all of what the Deputy said. I assure Deputy Quinn and the House that in recent weeks every effort has been made by every senior person involved in the Garda investigations, and the gardaí were involved in the working team every day, to trace what are believed to be 60 missing sheep. They have not given up on that from the time they first received information. They believe they were possible imports from the UK and the precautionary slaughterings followed from the information which the gardaí had discovered. There have been slaughterings in Laois, Meath, Carlow and Wexford over the weekend because of the possible connections with Meigh and evidence suggests that the sheep in those premises may have been smuggled south via the Collins premises in Meigh, although it is not clear how many of the slaughtered animals were on the Collins premises. There were also other areas to where they moved as well. I am satisfied that every bit of information detected has been dealt with. The Garda investigation team believes it has tracked them down, in so far as it can, but in terms of following up any information with regard to the Garda action and looking at some of the factories, all of those investigations are ongoing by the Garda.

On the tagging issue, I understand the Minister has finalised the arrangements in that regard and is now proceeding with the tagging.