Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 May 2001

Vol. 536 No. 3

Ceisteanna–Questions. - Arms Trial.

Ruairí Quinn

Question:

1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if any files in his Department relating to an alleged plot to import arms in 1970 and the subsequent dismissal of two Government Ministers have been withheld from the National Archives under section 8 of the National Archives Act, 1986; if he has undertaken any investigation as to whether any files relevant to these events created within his Department may subsequently have been destroyed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11916/01]

Ruairí Quinn

Question:

2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will outline the personal papers of the former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, relating to an alleged plot to import arms in 1970 and the subsequent dismissal of two Government Ministers, which were held, or are being held, by his Department; if all such papers have been released; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12055/01]

Michael Noonan

Question:

3 Mr Noonan asked the Taoiseach if any files in his Department relating to the 1970 arms crisis have been withheld from the National Archives under section 8 of the National Archives Act, 1986; the steps he will take to ensure that these files are made available; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12809/01]

Joe Higgins

Question:

4 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if any personal papers of former Taoiseach, the late Mr. Jack Lynch, relating to the alleged importation of arms conspiracy in 1970, are held in the Department of the Taoiseach; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12879/01]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

5 Mr Sargent asked the Taoiseach the files in his Department relating to the alleged plot to import arms in 1970 which are being withheld from the National Archives; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13496/01]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Question:

6 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if personal papers of former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, relating to the 1970 arms importation controversy were held in his Department; and, if so, if they will be released. [13814/01]

The Taoiseach

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.

Files in my Department which relate to Northern Ireland are released annually to the National Archives, as provided for in the National Archives Act, 1986. In the case of the 1970 files, these have been available for public inspection since January this year. There are 29 such files. Material received from the estate of the former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, including a small amount of papers, of which 12 relate to the period 1968 to 1970, were categorised as official and released to the National Archives.

Regarding the release of material over 30 years old, no files were withheld, nor is there any evidence that any file was destroyed. However, two documents were withheld under section 8(4)(f2>b) and (f2>c) of the National Archives Act, 1986. One was from the departmental files and one from the papers returned by the estate of Jack Lynch. These documents were of a security nature, containing information given in confidence. They did not relate to arms importation or to any subsequent investigations. Regarding other documents, some minor abstractions were made under section 8(4)(f2>c) of the Act. These included either the names and addresses of correspondents or sentences or paragraphs which named individuals or expressed views about individuals which, if released, could cause distress or danger to the individuals or lead to an action for damages or defamation.

The material received from the estate of the former Taoiseach also included two papers written after Mr. Lynch had left office which were personal papers. These were the only papers which, on preliminary examination, were considered to be in this category. They were a statement for his own record concerning a journalist's interview with him. They are relevant to aspects of the current debate and, as such, were put in the public domain. These two are held by a political adviser in my Department, Dr. Martin Mansergh. The question of where they will finally be deposited will be considered in due course.

I should point out to the House that, as these are not Government papers, I do not have responsibility for them. I am, however, happy to reply about them as a courtesy for the information of the House. The first part of a departmental file which contained details of the appointments of the 13th Government in July 1969 was released to the National Archives at the beginning of the year. The second part of the file spanned the years 1970 to 1976 and did not fall due for release. It contains records, mostly of a formal kind, of the dismissals, resignations and appointments in 1970. However, for completeness and to follow the procedure in relation to Government minutes, memoranda and Northern Ireland files, this file was split and the 1970 part sent to the National Archives.

Mr. Quinn

There are a number of questions arising from the Taoiseach's reply. First, can he confirm that no files relating to this period were destroyed either by the former Taoiseach, Mr. Lynch, or by any successor? Second, can the Taoiseach clarify what will happen to the personal papers? The estate of Mr. Lynch was of the view that the papers were sent to the Department for what was quoted in the newspapers as "safekeeping". I put it to the Taoiseach that the safest place is to link them with other papers in the National Archives. I recognise that technically they are not contemporaneous governmental documents with a different status from the other documents referred to by the Taoiseach. It is over four weeks since the recent controversy over the alteration of documents in the Department of Justice, Equality, and Law Reform and those sent to the Attorney General. The Minister for Justice, Equality, and Law Reform undertook to conduct an inquiry into those matters. Can the Taoiseach indicate if the inquiry is completed and, if so, when will the Minister report to the House?

The Taoiseach

To expand on what I said in my reply about the destruction or loss of files, there is no evidence that files were destroyed in the Department. I had inquiries made about the 1970 documents with present and former staff, including some employed in 1970. They stated categorically that during their service they have no knowledge of files going missing or being destroyed. The Department's policy, since 1986, has been to ensure the preservation and proper maintenance of official files, as it was before the Act. This is evidenced by the volume of files released to the National Archives when the National Archives Act, 1986, came into effect. The Department complies with the Act by releasing files annually. It releases everything, unless restricted. Even in a borderline case, it releases the file.

In reply to Deputy Quinn's second question on the estate's release of papers, there were about 50 records returned last year and they were not evaluated for categorisation as personal or official. They were assumed to be mainly official because of their content. Most relate to the North, but some were made after Mr. Lynch left office and so were personal. That is why the two in question were released. Some of the papers are in the National Archives. The others will be looked at. The archivist from the National Archives assists the Department to ensure conformity and consistency in each section on what is released. The archivist will examine the remaining papers. I have not seen them but an official who has glanced at them informs me that some are personal. Many of them are individuals writing to the Taoiseach expressing an opinion. Except for those passed to Government, all the Jack Lynch papers are in the National University of Ireland, Cork. These papers should join up with—

Mr. Quinn

So they will either go to the National Archive or the National University of Ireland, Cork?

The Taoiseach

If they are determined as official papers they go to the National Archives. The fact that former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, held these papers is an obvious indication that he considered them of a personal nature. In fairness they should also go to UCC to link up with other papers. That was clearly his intention because he did not hold many papers. They will have to be looked at first by the archivists.

On the third question I am told that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will be in a position to report to the House on the arms crisis issues in about a fortnight. He hopes to have the work finished sometime next week and should be able to report to the House in two weeks.

Mr. Quinn

When the Minister is in a position to report will the Taoiseach make arrangements with the Whips to provide for a question and answer format? We do not just want a statement to be written into the record of the House but would like space for questions to be put to the Minister.

The Taoiseach

I will consider that matter. Most of the work that the Minister is engaged in is collecting facts from all the sources, officials and Departments. Whatever he says in his statement, he will not be in a position to be questioned on the records themselves.

Mr. Quinn

Deputy O'Malley might like to put some questions to him.

Mr. Noonan

The events took place over 30 years ago and it is at that point where current politics and history meet. I appreciate it is difficult to deal with what on the one hand many see as historic events and on the other what many see as very relevant to current political debate. I am aware of the Taoiseach's concerns about the reputations of persons alive, and the concerns of the family about the reputations of those that have passed away.

One issue I would like to put to the Taoiseach was also put by Deputy Joe Higgins previously. The family of the late Garda Richard Fallon is concerned that his murder may have been connected in some way with the importation of arms into the country. Before the Minister completes his inquiry could he have the Fallon file examined to see if it is possible to publish the papers in that file with the other papers? There has been such a passage of time since the murder that the security reasons connected with the protection of witnesses would no longer appear relevant. Rather than insist on the principle of non-disclosure because it is a security file, will the Taoiseach ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to consider including it for publication or at the least have the file examined?

The Taoiseach

I am aware of what has been requested by the Fallon family. Deputy Noonan has made a few requests and I will bring them to the attention of the Minister. He will have to seek advice in that matter. The Deputy knows that there were court cases about the issue and the people acquitted are still alive. I will raise the issue and ask for it to be examined.

Mr. Noonan

I thank the Taoiseach for that. In the same context that Deputy O'Malley has concerns about his reputation, the Gibbons family have concerns about the late Mr. Gibbons's reputation and Mrs. Lynch has concerns about her late husband, the former Taoiseach's reputation, I put it to him that there is another family who lost their father. If anything can be done in the context of public papers this should be dealt with also.

The family of the late Mr. Peter Berry are also concerned. There are extensive documents in the possession of one member of that family other than the portions of the Berry diaries not yet published which are also relevant. Whatever decision the Minister arrives at and whatever he puts on public display in a fortnight's time the controversy will not stop. Will the Taoiseach reconsider a proposal I made to him a few weeks ago? Will he find an appropriate retired judge, get a historian and an officer of this House, perhaps the Clerk of the Dáil, and let them scrutinise all papers and try to bring forward a schedule of the facts? If the facts then need to be scrutinised further, it will be a matter for the House to deal with as it sees fit.

The Taoiseach should consider the next step now because I can assure him that if additional papers are published the issue will not be concluded. A manner of dealing with them must be considered. It would be helpful if people used to dealing with archives and briefs, such as historians and those with legal knowledge and the staff of this House who would ensure that the rights and privileges of this House are preserved, were to examine all relevant papers so they could in so far as possible present the facts to this House in a report. The House could then decide what further action should be taken if required.

The Taoiseach

I agree with Deputy Noonan that when the Minister completes his work it is unlikely to resolve all the questions and issues. That would be difficult with such conflicting views and evidence. The main issue is to try to establish all that is available. We try to do that with the 30 year rule but we will try to see what else is there that might be useful and put it into the public domain. My view is that whatever we can find should be put in the public domain. The Deputy also raised the issue concerning the records of the House. That is being examined and it will be discussed later in the day. That too should be put in the public domain.

The Government will have to consider what is best to do then and we are already considering that. A number of people familiar with archives and historical facts who have raised this issue with me have divergent views but most would feel that our bringing in a historian to try and put it all together would be wrong. Many believe the only way to put together and present the facts is to bring in an archivist. A historian or researcher would have opinions and at 30 years removed from the facts that would not be the way to deal with the issue. I heard what the Deputy has said about the matter being administered by some third party. We will give consideration to how best to go about it.

My primary duty at this stage, in the spirit of the National Archives rules and the spirit of what it is all about, is to put all the facts into the public domain. People will interpret them differently but we will try to give as complete a picture as is physically possible. We may use the assistance of an archivist to try to present it in a meaningful way. We have also the papers of the House the release of which the Ceann Comhairle and his office are deliberating on. We will give consideration to the other points made.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): Does the Taoiseach agree that section 8 of the National Archives Act, 1986, needs to be amended and that it is not really appropriate that officers from a Department of State, for example, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in consultation with an officer from the Taoiseach's Department, should have the power to decide whether very important files relating to the Department of State in question should be released in view of the fact those officers have, if you like, political bosses to whom they are accountable? The predecessors of the current Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, for example, were also Ministers for Justice. It is not really appropriate that that is where the power should lie. There should be an independent mechanism for evaluating all the papers that should go into the National Archives and it should be extremely rare that anything would be refused to be put into the National Archives.

Deputy Noonan alluded to my question to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform regarding the Fallon case. Does the Taoiseach agree that 31 years later, it would be a matter of justice for the family and in the public interest that the Fallon file be released by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform into the National Archives? Is he aware that disturbing rumours proliferated at the time and continue to do so that there was political interference from a high level with the investigation of that tragic incident? It is a matter of justice for the family that these matters are cleared up. Is the Taoiseach aware that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said to me that he did not propose to include this case in his investigation and report on the arms crisis and that it was to be a very narrow investigation?

I would like the Taoiseach to consider something and maybe reply next week, because there will be oral questions to the Taoiseach. I understand the Taoiseach, under section 8(11) of the National Archives Act, can revoke an order made not to release papers. Will the Taoiseach tell me today whether he will revoke the banning of the Garda Fallon file being put into the National Archives or, at least, reflect on it and be in a position to tell me next week?

The Taoiseach

In relation to the Garda Fallon issue, I have replied to Deputy Noonan. I will take account of what Deputies have said. That is a power I have in relation to Government files, or files within my domain. The Garda Fallon file, in so far as it concerns the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, is probably more a Garda file and Garda record. I do not think I have that power but one way or the other, I do not exercise that power other than by way of a general rule that all records possible should be put into the public domain. I am just following the practice that has been followed since 1986 by all my predecessors.

The second question was about section 8(4) of the National Archives Act. The reason it was included was to make it clear that the certification duty of this lies with an officer of the Department, an officer of the State, a civil servant. I know Deputy Higgins would not mean any disrespect to the officers but it would be a mistake to think that they act under any kind of political control on these issues – they do not. This is a function they have under the Act and, as in all these areas, they would not consult the Minister on those issues, or the Taoiseach. They make that decision and where there is any doubt, they will refer their questions to an archivist in the National Archives. I would not be asked in any case whether they should release this, that or the other. That is not what happens.

Section 8(4) of the Act specifies that:

An officer of a Department of State authorised for the purposes of this subsection may, with the consent of an officer of the Department of the Taoiseach so authorise (except in relation to records of the Department of the Taoiseach), certify, in relation to particular Departmental records, or a particular class or classes of Departmental records prescribed in accordance to subsection (11), which are more than 30 years old and are specified in the certificate, that to make them available for inspection by the public–

(a) would be contrary to the public interest [grounds have been set down as to what that is] or,

(b) would or might constitute a breach of statutory duty, or a breach of good faith on the ground that they contain information supplied in confidence [That would also be known and in some of these cases, information was supplied in confidence], or

(c) would or might cause distress or danger to living persons on the ground that they contain information about individuals, or would or might be likely to lead to an action for damages or defamation.

The grounds are quite clear. The officer makes a decision based on what is in the legislation, which is very clear, and on the practice and, in cases where there is any doubt, in consultation with an archivists from the National Archives. As I said the general rule is that as much information as possible should be given, that files should not be withheld and that these sections should not be used to withhold information. That has been followed for the past 14 or 15 years.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): In some cases, there could be a very good reason to break what the Taoiseach said has been a precedent since 1986. He might agree that there will be a natural caution, especially on the part of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which has a certain culture of secrecy and tightness with information. Given that the Act states that one of the reasons for not releasing files is that it might be contrary to the public interest, does the Taoiseach agree that to resolve the matter of the Fallon murder, the investigation, the context in which it happened and the events that surrounded it, it would be in the public interest that it was brought out into the open and that if there are ghosts to be exorcised, let them be exorcised? The Taoiseach has the power under section 8(11) in regard to the Fallon papers – it is in his hands. If the State or some agency of the State and the neighbouring state, 30 to 33 years ago was, in some way, involved in, for example, infiltrating shadowy paramilitary organisations and that it was related to the Arran Quay situation and the tragedy that followed for a family, it should be brought out into the open. Will the Taoiseach between now and next week at least reflect on the request of the Fallon family?

The Taoiseach

As regards the Fallon family, I will raise the matter with the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform but we are assuming that there is a file in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform that relates to that which is being held back from the National Archives under the 30 year rule. I am not too sure that is an assumption we should make or whether the file is a Garda file which would not come up for consideration by me under section 8(11) or by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform or the designated officers dealing with these matters.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): On a point of information, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform specifically said that there was a Department file which was not released—

The Taoiseach

On the Fallon papers?

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): Yes.

The Taoiseach

That is what Deputy Noonan asked. Deputy Noonan asked that the file should at least be looked at and, if possible, that it should be put in the public domain. Those are the two questions.

Without taking issue with the Deputy, I believe the system whereby an independent officer acts without interference is a good one. It works well and, where there is doubt, the archivist of the National Archives makes that known. I do not want to go into detail on some of the exceptions, of which there are few. They relate to name changes and what key people, mostly in the public domain, political leaders, in Northern Ireland said at the time. Very little is held back. Having read the data, I would have thought far more would have been held back, considering the period. However, it is clear that little has been held back. It is also clear why it was a good idea not to release what was held back. It is not that there is much data. It is the opposite.

I will raise the issue relating to Garda Fallon. I understand what Deputies are saying on that issue.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

A debate on the arms crisis has already taken place in the Seanad. Will the Taoiseach agree that such a debate should also take place in the Dáil? Will he facilitate such a debate? Will the Taoiseach also agree that any debate on this matter must look at the context in which these events occurred and the events leading up to them?

Does the Taoiseach recognise the legitimate point of view held by a significant section of Northern Nationalists and many others then and since that the real problem was not the actions of the Lynch Government or a section of it but the lack of action and the failure to defend the communities then at risk by moving the crisis onto the international stage, a critical objective which might have prevented the much greater conflict which followed?

The Taoiseach

I will resist the temptation to give my version of history. It would not help the debate. I do not have a clear recollection but, from my reading of the details, I would have thought there would have been enormous support in those days among Northern Nationalists for the actions taken by the Lynch Government in going to the United Nations, in putting pressure on the British administration, and doing all it could to contain a difficult situation, and among the citizens in the South who facilitated those Nationalists who were evicted, who suffered the trauma of Bombay Street and other traumas.

As I said earlier today in the context of the 75th anniversary of the Fianna Fáil Party, the Lynch Government was not thanked enough for containing a difficult situation in the Border region and in the South. These issues are of immense interest. It is unlikely that the problems will come to an end on the issuing of further information. Thought must be given as to how best to document events so that people can look at these issues. Clearly not everyone will agree because they have different interpretations, different memories, family connections and so on. I understand that. The least we can do is ensure we have as complete a record as possible, and we should do that.

Mr. Noonan

Lest anybody thought I was being partial in mentioning the reputations of people on one side of the argument in my previous supplementary question, I am conscious that the reputations of Captain James Kelly, the late Colonel Hefferon and former Ministers of this House are also relevant to the debate. I am not surprised that the Taoiseach has received infor mation and advice from archivists because, in Dr. Martin Mansergh, he has one of the best archivists in the country working for him. An opportunity must be given to persons who hold private papers to submit them for examination. If left totally in the hands of archivists, that will not happen. Some kind of forum that will request that private papers be sent in is necessary. I have in mind particularly the papers held by the daughter of the late Peter Berry which are very relevant. Whatever action is taken afterwards to establish the facts, they will be incomplete without access to certain private papers. Whoever does the job should be positioned to appeal to everybody who has relevant information, whether documentary or verbal, to come forward. Until work is being done at that level, there is no chance of establishing the facts.

We all have our memories and personal views of the events of the late 1960s and early 1970s. The Lynch Government did a good job in those days. The action taken by the former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, followed by former Taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave, brought about a situation where, in 1974, the Sunningdale Agreement was signed. That agreement in effect incorporated everything contained in the Good Friday Agreement and probably was a more advanced agreement in some respects. While we are rewriting history, therefore, we should state that Sunningdale was brought down by a combination of fundamental Unionism and fundamental Republicanism.

The Taoiseach

I appreciate what the Deputy is saying. We have to give consideration to all these issues. There are other collections too, other people's private papers, other personal papers.

Mr. Quinn

Some people say they have no papers. We will have to wait a long time for the Kinsealy papers.

Mr. Noonan

They need to be asked for, publicly and formally.

The Taoiseach

Papers have been mentioned which are not in the public domain. I am not sure how one gets the complete picture.

Mr. Quinn

What about all the papers that have been burned?

The Taoiseach

There are difficulties. We will take those into account before the Minister replies. That is the purpose of this discussion.

Mr. Currie

Will the Taoiseach agree that, while the full truth of what happened in those years may never be disclosed, the more of the truth we have the better. There are those in the North from both sides of the political divide who seek to raise fears and suspicions and to make capital out of what happened in those years. Does the Taoiseach agree that making the truth clear will limit the mischief making and fear arousing capacity of those people? Does he also agree that for Northern Nationalists it is important to know the circumstances that led to the greatest forced movement of population since the end of the Second World War, and that it is important for Nationalists in the North to know the position of the Government in the South, to which Northern Nationalists look for support?

The Taoiseach referred to papers which are not included and which we hope will become available in the future. Is the Taoiseach aware that important information given to at least one member of the Cabinet on the basis it would be passed to the Taoiseach and to the Government, and which could have had a considerable bearing on the decisions of the Government at the time, was not made available? I would be interested to see in any disclosures whether there were any references to that, particularly in the papers of Jack Lynch which were written at a later stage.

The Taoiseach

The papers written by Jack Lynch at a later stage are now in the public domain, other than those officially in the archives. I may go into the archives later on but from what I know they will not throw any great light on these events.

I am not sure what event the Deputy is talking about. There were issues about conversations with Northern leaders that were not in the public domain, though some are now, but whatever is there is on the record. Other than what is kept for safety reasons, the rest is in the public domain.

I agree with Deputy Currie on everyone working out everything that happened in this period. That is the basis of the National Archives Act in so far as it can work. Official documents, Government memoranda, minutes and so on are put in the public domain each year so that people can scrutinise them with regard to any issue to form a view. That works fairly well on most issues but we should not be surprised that people form different views of this issue. The more information we have the more it helps but that is all we can do.

I do not see how we can see every aspect of everything that happened. Matters were not documented and people are no longer with us, having gone to their eternal reward. All we can do is our utmost and historians will then interpret that in different ways, as they have done with everything else in history. The National Archives Act can only put matters into the public domain. There are reasons for matters not being put in the public domain but I think there is nothing there that will help. The records of the House are in the public domain though I am not sure if those would resolve everything.

I agree with Deputy Currie. As I said earlier, we should put into the public domain everything we possibly can that does not damage anyone or give rise to defamation. We can then see how that helps the discussion, though I do not think it will resolve the argument.

Mr. Higgins

(Dublin West): Does the Taoiseach agree that what finishes up in the National Archives is partly accidental and that a much wider effort is needed to get a true picture of what happened during that period 30 years ago? Regarding the manner in which it is now proposed that this be investigated, does the Taoiseach agree that that is not really satisfactory? Society in the late 1960s and early 1970s was in considerable flux, not just in the North but in the South. We had mass movements against squalid housing, the excesses of the housing cowboys, “Tacateers” and so on. Given that senior political figures of the day, from the Taoiseach's party, intervened consciously to split the Republican movement, which was moving towards the left, does the Taoiseach agree that perhaps the investigation of that period should not be left to their successors?

I know the Taoiseach was a callow youth in those days and is not personally responsible but he is the successor to the political establishment of the day which was involved in these events. As such, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform or his Department are not the best means by which a comprehensive investigation into these events should take place.

The Taoiseach

The initial port of call here is to get the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform to gather all he can. He is aware of the views of the House and some additional points have now been made. He will gather all he can in order to be in a position to report to the House on where we are. We will then see what we can do in addition but there is no unified view on that; the Government will have to consider it. I am not sure there is a solution to this that will make everyone happy, now or in the future, but at least we can try to gather as much as we can that is within the National Archives Act, Government Departments and other relevant locations. The Attorney General, the Minister and their officials have been working hard on this for the past four weeks or so.

An Ceann Comhairle

That concludes Taoiseach's Questions for today.