Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 5 Oct 2004

Vol. 589 No. 3

Leaders’ Questions.

Mr. Kenny

It is now clear that in August 2001 the Garda Síochána had information from Interpol concerning details of alleged customers of a company offering access to child pornography websites and that the name of Brian Curtin was included in that information.

On 25 May of this year, the Taoiseach informed me that Mr. Curtin was appointed a judge on the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, of which the then Attorney General, now Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, was a member. It is clear from section 14 of the Courts and Court Officers Act 1995 that the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board has the power to consult persons concerning applicants' suitability for appointment as judges. Will the Taoiseach inform me whether the board consulted the Garda before JudgeCurtin's appointment? If the answer to that question is "No", does that not mean there is a major shortfall in the operation of that board when recommending such sensitive and critical appointments? If contact was made, it appears likely that the appointment of Judge Curtin would not have happened and we would not now face uncharted constitutional territory before a committee of the Houses. Will the Taoiseach comment on that and has he moved to address this serious lapse in procedures?

The Taoiseach

As we know, Brian Curtin was appointed a judge of the Circuit Court almost three years ago in November 2001. On 27 May 2002, the Director of Public Prosecutions prosecuted Judge Curtin for knowingly having in his possession child pornography, which is contrary to section 6 of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998. Accordingly, the matter was dealt with on indictment in the Circuit Court in Tralee. The trial commenced on 20 April and ended on 23 April on the basis that the warrant on which the Garda searched Judge Curtin's house was sent on the day that it was executed, namely, 27 May 2002.

The fact that the name of Brian Curtin appeared on a list received by the Garda Síochána from Interpol in August 2001 was put on the record of the House by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on 2 June this year during the motion regarding the procedure on Judge Curtin's removal from office. In fact that was the first matter referred to in the resolution. However, the Garda Síochána has confirmed that it did not advise the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform at that time, Deputy O'Donoghue, or his Department of having received the list from Interpol. Brian Curtin from Tralee, County Kerry was one of more than 100 names on that Interpol list. Obviously the Garda investigation was required to ascertain who Brian Curtin actually was and whether or not it was he who personally accessed the sites. A garda in Harcourt Street was not to know that Brian Curtin was a senior counsel in Tralee who was at the time being considered by the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board for the Bench. Deputy Kenny is asking whether the judicial appointments board would have checked with the Garda. I cannot be certain that it did, but I would surmise it would not have, in a case like that. Even if it had carried out a security check on Brian Curtin, it is doubtful whether the information from the investigation would have been received at that stage. Security checks seek details of criminal convictions. At that stage a security check would not have shown up that he had a criminal conviction because he did not have one, and still has not.

Deputy Kenny's last point was that the procedures of the judicial appointments board should be amended so that it could be seen whether someone to be appointed had a criminal record or was on a Garda list. I am not sure how the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board would take that suggestion. However, he raised the question as to whether a security check was done. A security check is done on staff in many areas and I will look at that point. I cannot say for definite, but I believe it is unlikely, because of the people being dealt with. It is highly unlikely that the board carries out a security check on the type of people who would be on that list, but I will check that point.

Mr. Kenny

Will the Taoiseach set in train a system whereby the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board should check with the Garda as regards appointments such as this? If a caretaker is being appointed to a school, a character reference is sought from the Garda. I had a distraught parent on the telephone last night who was unable to adopt a child because of a minor indiscretion with regard to a driving licence, I understand. As I understand the mechanics of the final approval for such an appointment, the current Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who was then Attorney General was a member of the judicial appointments board, and the then Minister for Justice, Deputy O'Donoghue, and the Taoiseach would have had a final consultation about names under consideration. Does the Taoiseach recollect whether Deputy O'Donoghue, from that part of the country, made any comment about the suitability of the person being proposed for appointment? In his replies to me on 25 May this year, the Taoiseach said he would try to check whether the then Attorney General had any information to that effect. He appeared certain that he had not. Will he confirm what the position is now?

I will repeat that there is strong public concern over the necessity to have absolute clarity about appointments of such sensitivity and importance. It is necessary that the systems in place to supervise such appointments are seen to be absolutely above board and in the people's interest.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Kenny has raised two points. I may be incorrect, but I doubt that the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board or its secretariat or chairperson carries out security checks. I may be wrong, however.

Mr. Kenny

They are entitled to under the Act.

The Taoiseach

Perhaps they do, but I just have a feeling they do not. I take the point, however. I believe the important position of an usher in this House involves a security check. I believe all positions are important and should be checked. I shall make that suggestion.

On the other aspect, we have spoken about this before, but at no time did either the Attorney General or the Minister indicate that they had any knowledge or information to show that Brian Curtin was an unsuitable person. I have checked that since. While the Minister could recall who Brian Curtin was, neither he nor the Attorney General had information as to his unsuitability.

Mr. Rabbitte

Will the Taoiseach say what the poor people of Ireland did to deserve Deputy Brennan as Minister for Social and Family Affairs? He does not want the job. Clearly he has no interest in it. He got it by accident and poor people who are marginalised and unemployed are now going to have as their advocate and champion at the Cabinet table a man who would prefer to be doing anything else. Did Deputy Brennan threaten to resign his seat, as is reported, when he learned that Deputy Kitt was to be in the Cabinet and that he was to be dropped? Were representations made to retain him and if so, by whom, and how is it that he ended up in the Department of Social and Family Affairs.

Will the Taoiseach say if he got a letter of resignation from the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy McDaid? Deputy McDaid said he was sacked. If he was sacked it would require a Government decision, which meant the Taoiseach came to the House with 18 rather than 17 junior Ministers if Deputy McDaid had not been removed by Government decision. I do not want to start any shockwaves in sub-Saharan Africa at the prospect of my constituency colleague, Deputy Conor Lenihan, being deprived of his office, but is he appointed properly? Will the Taoiseach say how he reconciles all of this with Inchydoney? At Inchydoney the message was that the social inclusion agenda was at the top of Fianna Fáil priorities. How is it now that we have ended up with Deputy Brennan in the Department of Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Harney in the Department of Health and Children——

Mr. S. Power

Labour had Deputy De Rossa in social welfare for long enough.

Mr. Rabbitte

——and Deputy McDowell in charge of equality? How can any of that be reconciled? If the Taoiseach believes these Ministers were not performing in their existing Departments, why should anyone believe they will perform in their new Departments? These are the same tired, failed old faces — no change — and the Taoiseach says that by shuffling them around we can somehow expect a better performance.

The Taoiseach

I assure Deputy Rabbitte that Deputy Brennan will be a very good Minister for Social and Family Affairs.

Ms Burton

The Taoiseach is the only one who thinks that.

The Taoiseach

As someone who has been a good constituency politician, caring for the welfare of his constituents, I believe he is well suited for that change from his last post of transport——

Mr. Durkan

What about the Luas?

The Taoiseach

I believe he will do an excellent job. I do not believe he will be quite as Scrooge-like as Deputy Rabbitte's former colleague and the president of his party, who only gave £1.50 to the old people when he had the limited opportunity of looking after them. Deputy Brennan will be far more caring. He will demonstrate this tonight when he talks about the carers' issue in the House.

What normally happens as regards the appointment of Ministers and Ministers of State is that Ministers resign. Whether they are resigning, as in this case, or whether they are asked to resign, I receive letters of resignation. In the case of Deputy McDaid, when I met him on Wednesday, I did not ask him for a letter of resignation. I did that on Thursday morning. When I gave the list of appointments to the House on Thursday morning, I had not received that letter. I now have the letter from Deputy McDaid, so the statutory duty is fulfilled.

I will finalise that regulation when I give the individual Ministers——

Mr. Rabbitte

Where does that leave Deputy Conor Lenihan? Is his appointment regularised?

The Taoiseach

Deputy Conor Lenihan's appointment is now totally regularised because I regularised it this morning. We will have to wait for the next Cabinet——

(Interruptions).

An Ceann Comhairle

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

The Taoiseach

In reply to Deputy Rabbitte, I was amazed there was so much interest in the reason the Government was looking to the future in terms of what we are trying to do as a caring Government and the huge expenditure we have put into social, community, health and other aspects. We were looking to hear a broad based view on where we should best allocate resources in the next budget and following budgets based on the excellent report brought forward by Fr. Healy and his colleagues. We looked at that report and believed we should have received a presentation on it. I suggest that meeting was very good for all my colleagues in my party and for everyone else in that we saw the things we should do and where the priorities lie. When anybody brings forward a report on the priorities in terms of the areas in which we should spend money, it is right that the Government should look at it. In this case the Government did that.

Mr. Rabbitte

If it had not been a constituency colleague of mine I would have raised earlier the improper appointment of Deputy Conor Lenihan. I am glad the appointment has been regularised now and I hope it will not be an impediment to him in any way.

Mr. C. Lenihan

Very touching.

Mr. Rabbitte

Does the Taoiseach not accept that the people behind him, and his colleagues watching on the monitors, are as confused as those of us on this side of the House about the point of the whole exercise? There is neither purpose nor pattern to the reshuffle. It is like a farmer at the cattle mart who goes into the bullpen with the cattle and prods them to move them around. One bullock gets out the gate but the rest are in the position in which they were before he moved them around. Is it right to say that the Minister, Deputy Brennan, is familiar with the social inclusion agenda or dealing with poor people? The only time he ever touched on it was when he was looking after Deputy Healy-Rae, Deputy Fox and others. He does not want to be there.

What is the Taoiseach saying about him? Were his decisions at Dublin Airport not Government decisions? Is the Taoiseach saying he was off on a frolic of his own at Dublin Airport and that the new Minister for Transport will behave differently or was he pursuing Government policy? How can the Taoiseach reconcile this Cabinet with the commitment he made at Inchydoney and since 11 June that there would be a more compassionate, caring face to this Government? He has put square pegs into round holes. People who were unable to perform in their old Departments are now expected to deliver the goods in new ones.

The Taoiseach

As I said last week and previously, decisions made by Government are collective, responsible decisions and people act towards the agenda. As far as I am concerned, everybody is equal, regardless of the Ministry held. Whether it is I, a Minister or a Minister of State, people are equal. They have a job to do. Decisions are discussed in advance. The Government makes policy and by moving people and bringing four new people to the Cabinet table, which is a quarter of the Cabinet, we are bringing new vibrancy, activity and dynamic to the Government. I hope the colleagues I have put forward will show that in all of their Ministries.

I will not take lectures from parties that, when in Government, never served the people who were in need. Tonight this House will debate the carer's allowance but it was this Government that brought in a carer's allowance. Most measures in the social welfare code were initiatives of my party or the parties in Government. If the Opposition has any good suggestions about new issues we will debate them but I will not listen to lectures by people who did not take the opportunity when they were in office.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I wish also to address the record of the Minister, Deputy Brennan, not the projected one in his new portfolio but rather the legacy he has left following his departure from the transport Ministry. I speak specifically in regard to Aer Lingus. Does the Taoiseach not agree that it is a scandal that the national airline has been sized up for a sell-off, a privatisation, to the management team at Aer Lingus? Does the incoming Minister for Transport intend holding to the policy position pursued by the Minister, Deputy Brennan, while he had that responsibility or will the Taoiseach now definitively, on his own behalf and on behalf of Government, reject the outrageous proposal for a management buy-out of Aer Lingus?

Will the Taoiseach not agree, and I do not believe this is overstating the fact, that it is an act of piracy against the interests of this country and economy, not to mention the workforce, that any particular body of the workforce, albeit the current management or whatever, is in a position to buy out and take overall control of Aer Lingus and then, presumably, participate in a massive stripping exercise for their own personal gain? We need to be cognisant of the fact that workers in Aer Lingus have been the key factor in ensuring its success over many years, and that is not to lose sight of the loyalty of Irish travellers who have been, through the most troubled and difficult economic times, loyal users of Aer Lingus. People throughout the country feel strongly about this issue. Does the Taoiseach not recognise that already there have been 3,000 redundancies? Does he not accept that it is a misnomer to describe the proposed further redundancy of 1,300 people as voluntary when it is clear that it is anything but voluntary, against the backdrop of this company recording profits of €100 million in the past year? Is the Taoiseach aware, and I ask him to be clear when replying to the House, of the detail of the proposals being put to some 1,300 workers and their families, with all that means, and does he accept that this is not voluntary and that the vague promises about replacement and relocation amount to nothing?

The Taoiseach

I remind Deputy Ó Caoláin that in recent years the Minister, Deputy Brennan, was involved in progressing projects, nowhere more than in Deputy Ó Caoláin's constituency in Carrickmacross, Castleblayney, Monaghan town and Cavan. They were all major projects and I thought he would have wanted to put that on the record of the House.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

What projects were those? I thought that was the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

Mr. D. Ahern

The Deputy was probably at the opening of them.

The Taoiseach

On the issue of Aer Lingus and as I said to Deputy Kenny some time ago, that report is being prepared. It should be ready some time in October and will examine some of the strategic issues raised about Aer Lingus. The Government will examine that report. I said previously that the idea of a management buy-out was not one I thought received support but we have to do these things properly and examine it. We also have to be realistic and twice in the past 14 years Aer Lingus has experienced grave difficulties, once in the early 1990s when we had to give what was then very substantial resources in the order of £360 million to help the company at that stage, which worked successfully, and then more recently on the back of the events of 11 September. There is no doubt that the good work of staff and trade unions in the airports is highly commendable. They have done a great deal to help keep the airline functioning and put it back into profit from the difficult situation in which it found itself in the last quarter of 2001. However, we cannot close our eyes to what is happening around the world. Some of the great airlines have gone because they were not able to compete and survive. As an island country we have a strategic national interest in an airline. These issues must be carefully examined and the Government will do that.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

I hardly think the Taoiseach's reply amounts to a categoric rejection of any proposal to countenance a managerial take-over or any other privatisation of the national airline. He perpetuates the concerns, not only of the workforce but of broad opinion on this issue across the country. Is the Taoiseach aware that in its last major redundancy offer Aer Lingus medical staff in the axed medical centre were offered relocation as baggage handlers within the Aer Lingus workforce? What is being offered to the 1,300 people who now face threat? Does he regard that as an offer that would keep them still in the voluntary bracket? Nobody else would.

Is the Taoiseach aware that there is great concern among the existing and the pensioned workforce of Aer Lingus about management's efforts to undermine the detail and terms of the pension entitlements and rights of workers in the airline? The Pensions Board deemed this exercise totally unacceptable. Will the Taoiseach at least be specific in addressing the retired and the present workforce in guaranteeing that he and the Government, particularly the new Minister for Transport, will ensure that there will be no tinkering with the pension rights and entitlements of existing or former employees at Aer Lingus? He should at least give them that comfort.

The Taoiseach

The Government will continue to work closely with the trade unions representing Aer Lingus and its staff on all the issues vital to their future. The report on the future of Aer Lingus, which considers some of the strategic options and some of the difficulties, will be available this month and there will be an exchange with the workers. I have stated that I am familiar with the efforts of the workforce, the trade union representatives, the staff and management associations, and with issues concerning former staff. I have addressed these and worked with the individuals involved since the late 1980s and will continue to do so.