Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 17 Feb 2010

Vol. 702 No. 3

Confidence in Minister for Defence: Motion.

I move:

That Dáil Éireann has complete confidence in the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O'Dea.

These are challenging times, possibly the most challenging facing any Government for decades, and the progress of many projects and plans will be subject to constraints on resources. Following on from the difficult decisions we took in the budget and the Estimates, and the review of the programme for Government, we now have a clear agenda for the future.

In the Department of Defence, the priority for the year ahead is to ensure that the Defence organisations maintain the capability to deliver on all of the roles assigned by Government. At the outset, I want to express my complete confidence, and that of the Government, in the Minister for Defence to continue to do his job.

In the midst of the worst global recession since the 1930s, arresting the decline in the strength of the Defence Forces and reaching the recently approved PDF strength of 10,000 will be achieved through prioritised recruitment, with the overarching focus remaining on the operations requirements of the Defence Forces. We are also committed to preparing a new defence White Paper for the period 2011-20 as we plan for the future. I believe the Minister for Defence, with his experience, his ability and his work ethic, is the best person to undertake this work.

I want to avail of the time this motion affords us to outline the massive contribution Deputy O'Dea has made in the Department of Defence. Before I do that, I want to put the Opposition's attack on the Minister in context. Its criticism of him does not arise from anything he has done in the course of his duties as Minister for Defence. I have heard people on the Opposition benches openly try to propagate the myth that the Minister is in breach of the Cabinet code of conduct, as set out in the handbook. This is once again a case of political discourse from the Opposition benches generating more heat than light. The matter of current controversy did not pertain to Deputy O'Dea's responsibilities as a Minister in the Government. It did not pertain to Government policies in any way, shape or form and had nothing to do with his function in the Department of Defence.

The facts are now well known. As the Minister said to the House yesterday, on 21 December a defamation action, taken against the Minister by Sinn Féin Councillor Maurice Quinlivan on foot of remarks made by the Minister in a local Limerick newspaper interview, was mutually agreed and settled in the High Court. As part of that settlement, a statement was read out in court which containing the following paragraph: "It is not suggested by Mr. Quinlivan that Mr. O'Dea acted other than innocently in making such denial and he accepts that there was no intention to mislead on the part of Mr. O'Dea". The Minister for Defence has acknowledged that his recollection of the interview in his original affidavit was wrong and he corrected his mistake when he realised it. He admitted and apologised for this mistake and agreed a settlement in which the other party fully accepted that there was no intention to mislead. The matter was a personal one between him and the local Sinn Féin representative concerned. It was dealt with and resolved in open court over two months ago and the matter is closed.

Clearly, it does not serve the Oireachtas well for people to throw around or imply ill-founded allegations of perjury in a coarse attempt to secure political advantage. Let us be clear, perjury does not arise here and it is despicable that some have suggested it does.

On a point of order, will the Taoiseach's script be circulated?

It will be circulated. My understanding is that where there is no intention to mislead and the matter is corrected as soon as possible, there is no question of perjury. The position is that for perjury to occur a person must know the statement to be false or not believe it to be true. Perjury in Ireland is governed by common law as the British Act of 1911 governing it never applied to Ireland. That Act is clear that a person has to give evidence which he "knows to be false or does not believe to be true". This formula has also been used in Irish statutes. Thus it is clear that perjury contrary to common law would also not arise where someone was mistaken.

The approach being taken by the Opposition parties indicates that they are once again trying to take the low road to high office. Their intent on a no confidence motion is completely spurious in both timing and motivation.

It is the standards which apply on the Government side that are under discussion.

On the issue of timing, Deputy Kenny informed the House yesterday that he found it "truly astonishing that two months after an issue in respect of a Cabinet Minister became public knowledge the Taoiseach did nothing about it. This is a matter of the most serious import." Who is the Deputy trying to fool?

Who is the Taoiseach trying to fool?

If he was of the view that this matter was of the most serious import why did he not raise it with me when the Dáil resumed last month? Why did he not demand a statement from either me or the Minister for Defence before now? Why are we debating the matter this week? Is it as a result of the traumas Deputy Kenny and his party endured last week?

We are discussing it because this is the Parliament.

Is the Leader of Fine Gael trying to divert attention from his crisis by foisting a drama on to somebody else?

Is he tabling motions of no confidence because he is afraid that if he does no another party will and that he will once again be seen as being behind the curve?

I will tell the Taoiseach one thing——

Fine Gael's posturing about a motion of no confidence is completely spurious and is merely a diversion.

This is a hangar six shot.

It is a hangover from the hangar.

That party's intent to seek the resignation of the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, is indicative of a growing tendency within the Opposition that focuses on personality rather than on politics. It is sad that once again their approach amounts to playing the man rather than the ball. Rather than be out-done in the sham indignation stakes by Deputy Gilmore, Deputy Kenny has chosen to join him in taking the old discredited Labour approach of seeking "heads in baskets".

The Opposition's eagerness for a motion of no confidence is premised not on the implementation or the administration of the programme for Government commitments on defence, but rather on Deputy Kenny's promise to his parliamentary party in the aftermath of the George Lee debacle that "what I'm going to do now is be myself".

The Taoiseach should deal with the issue.

The waste of valuable hours of Dáil debate on an unnecessary and unjustified motion of no confidence, at a time when there are real and pressing issues to be addressed, owes more to Deputy Kenny's need to prove to his members that he is, in the words of Deputy Coveney, "up to the job" than it does to any real concern or reservation regarding the running and administration of the Department of Defence.

This is about one of the Taoiseach's Ministers, not about one of my party's members.

I wish to say unequivocally that I am happy to affirm complete confidence in the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea. I have the utmost confidence in his abilities and in his capacity to do his job. On my election as Taoiseach it was my privilege to reappoint him as Minister for Defence. Deputy O'Dea has served in that role with distinction and his track-record is second to none. While achievement and ability to do the job obviously count for little to some, I believe the people of this country are fairer minded. They recognise achievement and they know that people sometimes make mistakes. Everyone is in favour of accountability in public office but when people make a genuine mistake which has nothing to do with their official duties and where they have moved to quickly correct that mistake——

Who decided that he made a genuine mistake?

——and have settled the matter with the aggrieved party, I do not see why I should listen to the usual, predictable calls from the Opposition to remove from office arguably the best, the most efficient and the hardest-working Minister for Defence to serve the country in recent times.

Members of the Opposition are more interested in innuendo and stirring up controversy than in people's political records.

What about the facts?

I would like to spend some time balancing those books and pointing out that I have the utmost confidence in Deputy O'Dea, who has shown real skills in overseeing the continued modernisation of the Defence Forces and bringing about significant progress across a broad range of areas.

A Deputy

He is the artful dodger.

The McCarthy report acknowledged the ongoing modernisation in defence and this is the vein in which I want to see the Minister continue during the period ahead. It is worth pointing out some of the many achievements of Deputy O'Dea as Minister for Defence. He has placed great priority on acquiring equipment and rationalising military barracks. The investment he has overseen has led to an improvement in Defence Forces equipment and resulted in the high level of morale among their members.

The Taoiseach should appoint him as Tánaiste.

I wish to share time with the Ministers for Finance and Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputies Brian Lenihan and Ryan. I make the point that whether it is in respect of overseas peace support, the development of the medical corps or the involvement of Defence Forces personnel in cash escorts, the Minister has always acted competently.

In highlighting the Minister's achievements and his ongoing programme of work, it is worth considering that in the past two years Fine Gael's spokesman on defence has put forward only three suggestions which differ from those of the Government in respect of defence policy. The number rises to four if one includes the idea put forward by Deputy Kenny in the run-up to the 2007 general election that we should establish Army-run boot camps.

Perhaps Deputy O'Dea could spend a little time in such a camp.

The Taoiseach is scoring heavily now.

Another Flannery idea.

The first of the three policy differences to which I refer relates to the triple lock. Unlike the other main political parties — Fianna Fáil, Labour, the Green Party — and the key independents, Fine Gael is committed to abandoning the letter and the spirit of the triple lock of Government, Dáil and UN approval before Irish troops serve overseas. The idea most consistently pursued by Fine Gael is to have the Army drill and fitness instructors deployed in schools to teach PE. That party has also suggested that we replicate the New Zealand model of defence forces administration——

This speech was not written by the Taoiseach.

——which would require us to more than double the number of people working in defence administration from just over 600 to over 1,400.

Did the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, write the Taoiseach's speech?

It is clear that Fine Gael has little to contribute to discourse on defence policy.

Where are the Green Party members of Government?

Fine Gael's approach is to try to drag down the Minister and inflict whatever damage it can on the Government to disguise from its lack of ideas and policy.

Did Deputy Gormley write that speech?

Send for the Green Party.

This Government is not going to bow to those cheap tactics. We have full confidence in the Minister for Defence and we look forward to him continuing to serve the Government and the people.

This matter was raised in the Upper House on Tuesday, 2 February last, and has been in the public domain since then. It was raised by a Senator affiliated to the main Opposition party on the occasion to which I refer. It is now Wednesday, 17 February. Therefore, the enormous sound and fury we have heard from the Fine Gael benches in recent days did not begin on 2 February when the matter was first raised. It was not considered a matter of moment, although it was raised by a member of the Fine Gael parliamentary party on Tuesday, 2 February.

What is the Minister's point?

Yes, what is his point?

In the past few days, however, it has suddenly become a matter of immense moment.

(Interruptions).

This is the case because of the discomfiture of the Opposition at the departure of former Deputy George Lee. That is why the matter is of immense moment now.

I thought the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, was a statesman.

It was of no moment on 2 February and was fit to be left floating on the Seanad's Order of Business on that day. In recent days, however, it has been raised.

The Minister for Defence raised it himself on Sunday last.

Given that it has been raised, let us deal with the issues involved. There are two crucial issues that arise. The first of these, as has been already outlined by the Taoiseach, is that this entire dispute came to light in the course of a civil proceeding between two individuals before the courts.

One of whom is a Minister.

Correct. However, being a Minister gives him no special position as a litigant in a courthouse.

He just makes the law.

He does not change the law in the course of an action. The law that applied to him in that action also applied to the other party to it.

The Government whip is going——

(Interruptions).

This was a civil matter which went before the courts and which was brought to a conclusion. Such matters are brought to a conclusion on the basis of both a settlement and the differences of the parties being reconciled.

The Minister should keep talking.

The other party to the action did not in any way refer to this earlier affidavit or suggest that he was compromised in respect of that affidavit.

He got the lump sum.

The matter was settled to the satisfaction of the two parties involved. That is their conclusion. As far as the public interest is concerned——

It did not happen.

The public interest in this matter — with one exception with which I will deal in a moment — ended when the case was settled.

(Interruptions).

The exception to which I refer is the position Deputy O'Dea holds as a Minister and whether his conduct in court in some way undermined that.

Deputy O'Dea swore an oath.

I must make the point that this was a civil action in which no public interest, other than and with the exception of that one matter, remained outstanding when the matter was brought to a conclusion.

(Interruptions).

What was the nature of the settlement?

Questions have been raised, not in this House but elsewhere, that the earlier hearing before the High Court on the application for the injunction was in some way compromised or prejudiced by the existence of this statement in the affidavit. In fact, this had no bearing on the matter. Due to the fact that the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, disavowed the allegation, there was no need to give an injunction.

The Minister should remember that he is in the Dáil.

The order was made and the other party was never prejudiced because the Minister — everyone must accept this — never repeated the allegation.

(Interruptions).

Where are the Greens?

There is no sign of them.

Let us deal with the principal question that has been raised in an ugly and unpleasant way in recent days. The word "perjury" was used in the Upper House and it has been used very freely in the newspapers. The fact is that perjury occurs only when an intentional misleading occurs.

(Interruptions).

Everyone in this House is aware of that. However, the word "perjury" has been insinuated into the debate and people have nodded and winked in its direction. That has been the approach of Opposition speakers at a time when this country faces far more serious difficulties.

(Interruptions).

It is an abuse of public life to have this type of debate even in progress. Deputy Kenny leads the Fine Gael Party; I challenge him to produce any evidence he has that the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, intentionally misled anybody.

The tape is the evidence.

There is no such evidence.

Who is the judge on that?

That is unbelievable

We heard his explanation yesterday evening. It is an explanation in which he plainly advanced all the reasons he made an honest mistake.

Why did he pay money?

Either he made an honest mistake or——

(Interruptions).

——he intentionally misled but there is no evidence that he intentionally misled——

What about the tape?

——and to date in this debate the Opposition has not produced a shred of evidence that he intentionally misled anyone on this court proceeding. The Opposition does not have any evidence of this but it constantly insinuates that in some sense he is guilty of an offence which he never committed.

Why did he pay compensation so?

Deputy Kenny cannot act, and this morning his spokesperson suggested that the Director of Public Prosecutions might have some role in this matter but there is no evidence being given to the Director of Public Prosecutions on this matter. What we have in this whole political saga is an attempt by Fine Gael to operate as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner. We are not having it.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Fianna Fáil is worried about the Sunday newspapers.

I am speaking on behalf of the Green Party to set out how we see the issue. The Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, has spoken to our party and set out his version of events——

Is the Green Party happy with it?

——and we followed, with everyone else——

——the various events as reported.

Is that why Senator de Búrca left?

It can be only on the basis of what one sees there that one makes a judgment and assessment.

The facts are clear. They have been gone through and I am sure they will be gone through further. Those facts are the original interview in the Limerick Chronicle following allegations of improper use of civil servants for political work; the allegations during the course of the interview regarding the use of the property by the people in question; the fact that the journalist then contacted those people——

The Minister has lost his confidence.

——and asked for comment and they threatened legal action against the newspaper which led to publication of a clarification by the newspaper; and the seeking of a High Court injunction against the Minister, Deputy Willie O'Dea, seeking that he would stop spreading allegations, as I see it——

Which side is the Minister on?

In April last year the High Court refused an injunction on the basis of a strong denial by the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, that he was spreading allegations; and in June 2009 the person in question was elected to Limerick City Council and pursued a defamation action against the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, who filed an affidavit repeating his denial.

This led to the discovery of a tape of the interview which showed that the Minister had made such allegations. The crucial matter, as I understand it——

The Minister's understanding is not great.

——is that at that point the Minister acknowledged that he had mistakenly stated he had not made the allegations——

When he got caught.

Why would he do that?

——and that he had relied in making such an affidavit on the published interview and in December 2009——

(Interruptions).

Get your gun now, Willie.

Allow the Minister to continue without interruption.

——a High Court judge ruled that the case was settled with damages and costs paid by Deputy O'Dea to the person in question. The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, also withdrew and apologised for the wrongful allegations——

Do you think that is all right?

——which apology, as I understand, was accepted by the other party——

It is not about the other party.

——who also accepted that the earlier affidavit had been a mistake——

Fianna Fáil is laughing at you.

(Interruptions).

——and was not an attempt to mislead. That is the crucial issue; when there was a mistake in the affidavit and something that was not true, it was acknowledged in court, dealt with in court, accepted by the other party and reported in the media as such. It was quite some time ago and I do not have the exact details.

What would you say if you were in Opposition?

As I see it that is the case——

——and the circumstances have been set out and I do not hear any disagreement.

You are uncomfortable and squirming.

They are bringing you down to their level.

In those circumstances, our job in Government is to get on with the crucial issues that face this country and to start providing the jobs that were mentioned earlier on. That is the crucial task that we have in Government.

(Interruptions).

I am happy that is what we should be concentrating on, confident that the Government can and will deliver on those jobs having delivered on the change to our budget and banking system, which will also help provide an economic turnaround.

What a day for the Green Party.

The Green Party will save one job anyway — Willie's.

That is what the public is looking for us to do. That is what we intend to do in Government and will continue to do for the betterment of the country.

More soldiers so.

No credibility. Is that how one can get out of perjury, by stating that one made a mistake?

I will share time with Deputies Michael D'Arcy and Brian Hayes.

This is not an untypical response from the Fianna Fáil Party. This is not about the Minister, Deputy Willie O'Dea; it is about the standards employed by the Taoiseach and the Government.

Your standards.

The Taoiseach's predecessor eloquently stated from the seat in which the Taoiseach is sitting that Fianna Fáil's ethics are to get in here and stay in here at all costs. Those are the ethics of the party the Taoiseach leads.

Nothing changes.

The good people of Limerick have elected that Deputy for many years, as is their absolute right. However, he is not sitting over there just as a Deputy; he is sitting there as an appointed Cabinet Minister, an officer of the court and a constitutional seal of office holder. As such, standards in that office must be of the highest integrity at a time when politics is in a deep depression of cynicism because of carry-on over the years. This is not just about the Minister, Deputy O'Dea; it is about standards at ministerial level, the highest level of political office in the land which the Taoiseach oversees. The response I heard from him and the former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform aided by the present Minister in defending this makes the matter even worse.

The reason for this debate is that a Minister in the Taoiseach's Government, who also happens to be a trained barrister, swore a false affidavit before the High Court and corrected it only when he was caught out on a tape.

That is not true.

Deputy Kenny, without interruption.

It is not a case of a simple mistake.

What about standards?

Stick to the facts.

The last time the Minister, Deputy O'Deam was caught out on a tape was when he defended his position and his party's position to the taxi men of Limerick——

Remember that, Willie?

——only to understand when it was played back to him that what he said when he came out was different from what he said inside.

The facts are these and the Minister from the Green Party should bear them in mind because I will quote him some of his words in a few minutes. The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, told an untruth about another person. It was not a political charge but an accusation that someone was involved in serious criminal activity, namely, operating a brothel. When he was challenged on that false claim, he swore a further untruth, that he had never made the original accusation. Because of that dishonest affidavit, a court refused to grant an order that would have corrected the original claim of criminal activity. In other words, the second highest court in the land made a decision based on the sworn testimony of a Cabinet Minister which was false. It was only when he was presented with irrefutable proof of his own voice and his own deceit that he corrected this false affidavit and made a settlement payment to the person he had wrongly accused.

First he stated this was a mistake. If the Minister is so used to making allegations like this that he cannot remember one specific instance then the Cabinet and the Government really have a bigger problem. If the Minister, Deputy O'Dea believed what he told that journalist then he should have gone to the Garda Síochána and reported it in the first instance.

They reported it to me.

The notion that any normal human being can say to a journalist "That man runs a brothel" and then forget that he said it when part of it was in print in the newspaper the following day just beggars belief.

He is blaming the Garda now.

It was never in print.

The second defence put forward was that both the slander and the false affidavit to the High Court were perpetrated by Willie O'Dea, private citizen, not Willie O'Dea, Minister.

Invisible hairs are being split here. A belief in the capacity to separate private impropriety from public office now appears to be standard operating procedure for Fianna Fáil in Government. We heard precisely the same logic from the Taoiseach's predecessor when he stated in regard to his Manchester whip-round that despite the fact that he was Minister for Finance at the time, he was Bertie Ahern, private citizen, when he was handed £15,000 in a brown envelope.

The Taoiseach's defence of his Minister comes straight from Fianna Fáil's code of operations. He claimed the Minister broke no code of ministerial ethics. The reason he broke no code is because some things are so obviously unethical that it would be laughable to include them in the code in the first place. For example, one would think the sentence: "Do not lie to the High Court" is redundant to a code of ministerial conduct.

The Taoiseach failed to answer specific questions regarding the steps he took in the two months since the issue was brought to his attention. His colleague is involved in a matter of importance. Equally, we have no indication that another Minister attempted to seek an explanation for these events. This is about the Minister as distinct from the Deputy. It appears that it was not an issue for anyone in this Government until it became the subject of an editorial in a national newspaper yesterday. That the Taoiseach and the Minister for Defence define their ethics by the specific warnings of a code of conduct rather than by a moral compass points to a lack of morality which is endemic to their party and which smears the good name of every Member of this House by association.

The vote before us is simple. If Deputies believe it is wrong for a Minister to tell an untruth in a sworn affidavit in the High Court, they can have no confidence in the Minister for Defence. If they believe it is appropriate for a Minister to swear a false and defamatory affidavit in the High Court, they can vote their support for him and, by doing so, define publicly their own political morality. These are the questions that must be answered by Fianna Fáil and Green Party Members when they vote on this issue.

The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government gave the following address on 24 February 2007:

It's great to be back in Galway. I came down on the overcrowded train. . .there's a strange cult called Fianna Fáil, a type of religion without vision or values; and every year in August they go on their annual pilgrimage to one of their sacred sites, the tent at the Galway races, where they pay homage to their gods and the gods bestow them with gifts for doing their bidding. . .The Green Party wants high standards in high places. . .

It is not getting them.

He continued:

. . .not because we are particularly virtuous, but because strong ethical standards improve the quality of our democracy. We do it because we recognise that there are now three Governments in this country — the permanent Government, which is the civil service; the present Government, if you can call it that, consisting of the PDs and Fianna Fáil; and the real Government which are the gods in the Ballybrit tent...We will introduce the strictest ethical standards ever seen in this country.

Three years on, the Green Party now has the chance to live up to these words.

On 12 November 1996, speaking on a motion of no confidence in the then Minister for Justice, Deputy O'Dea, stated:

If accountability means anything, blame must sometimes be taken and consequences sometimes ensue in the absence of knowledge and, therefore, in the absence of culpability in that sense. If that were not the position nobody would ever have to resign because, however great the disaster, it could never be proved as a definitive fact that a Minister had actual as opposed to constructive knowledge.

Here speaks a trained barrister and a supremely confident and energetic politician who knows the law of the land. He now serves not only as a back bench Deputy but also as one of the highest officers of the State in his position of Minister for Defence. How can anyone stand over this situation?

Deputy Kenny has not produced a shred of evidence.

The former and current Ministers for Justice, Equality and Law Reform are defending this state of affairs around the Cabinet table.

It would not happen in any other Parliament.

It is ironic——

Unlike Fine Gael Members we do not assassinate people, such as poor old George last week.

You have a lifetime's experience of it.

The last time an issue involving a tape was raised was in the case of the good father of the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan.

George Lee was used for a couple of months and then he was thrown away.

Allow Deputy Kenny to continue.

I put it to the House that the Minister, Deputy O'Dea——

The greatest character assassination was carried out by his colleagues after George left last Monday.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is supposed to stand over high standards.

It was a character assassination and now he is at it again.

It is not simply about the Minister, Deputy O'Dea. This is an act of criminality against the laws of the State which the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is supposed to uphold and the Taoiseach is supposed to implement.

As I said the other day, he is returning to type.

For what it is worth——

Guttersnipe politics.

(Interruptions).

Where is gorgeous George?

Members, please——

You got rid of him just because he did not suit your purposes.

You have no class.

You threw him to the wolves.

Deputy Dermot Ahern, please allow Deputy Kenny to continue without interruption.

Deirdre de Búrca was right.

Neither the Minister for Defence nor any other Minister would have lasted five minutes in a Government of which I was a member.

Or any other Government.

What about the money in the off-shore accounts? What a hypocrite you are.

Gather the wagons around the Minister for Defence. Fianna Fáil's ethics are get in here and stay in here, regardless of whether one makes a false affidavit and corrects it when found out by tape.

That is why Deputy Kenny took it out on George.

It makes no difference whether one is a Minister so long as the "FF, we rule" imprint is on one's heart. The law it makes, the law it breaks. The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, broke it as a Deputy and as Minister. He said it was an honest mistake but the person opposite me cannot be divided into Deputy, citizen and Minister. He is the Holy Trinity in one.

(Interruptions).

He knows he is wrong——

Deputy Kenny departed from his script.

——and all the other Ministers recognise that too.

For God's sake, sit down.

Three in one.

Be yourself for a change.

A serious and fundamental issue of standards has arisen but Ministers will not oversee or implement these standards. When the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, casts his vote this evening, he should remember his standards and the words of his absent leader.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Iris Robinson was fired for less.

Between yesterday's statement by the Minister for Defence and today's statements by the Taoiseach, an important intervention was made. The Official Report will show that the Minister, Deputy Willie O'Dea, intervened while the leader of my party, Deputy Enda Kenny, was speaking. He indicated in the course of the debate that the Garda informed him about the alleged incident and the owners of the property concerned. The Official Report will show that. If he obtained this information from the Garda, the question that inevitably follows is why exactly he settled. Why did he not put it in his statement or affidavit? Why did he not inform the House of that fact yesterday?

He forgot that too.

Did the Minister forget that as well?

The information was wrong.

Is he now denying that in an intervention to the leader of my party, Deputy Kenny, he suggested that the information came from the Garda Síochána? Is that a fact?

Why exactly did he not put that in his affidavit?

It turned out to be wrong.

(Interruptions).

Blame everybody else but yourselves.

Deputy Brian Hayes, without interruption.

Now it is the fault of the Garda Síochána. This is some turn-up for the books. If ever we had a political Pinocchio, it has to be the Minister. This is getting worse by the minute. It means that he misled the House yesterday. He did not put that information on the record yesterday. Why not? Why did he blurt it out today to save his political backside when he is up against the pressure of this debate?

Recollection deficit.

That is his problem.

We will soon have an opportunity to test the Deputy's recollection.

I wish to raise one other issue. The Minister made the original allegation on 10 March. On 14 April he signed a sworn affidavit to the courts. As a barrister, he is an officer of the court. He is a senior Cabinet Minister. That was four weeks later. It was not four months, years or decades. It was four weeks after he made the very serious allegations against the gentleman concerned. Why did he not check it out? Why did he not go back to check his sources? Why did he not go to all of the third parties concerned? All of this smells of Fianna Fáil circling the wagons.

I have a question for one member of the Government who is not present — I do not mind the Greens, they are hugely irrelevant in all of this anyway.

They are gone anyway.

Where is Deputy Mary Harney, the person who built her career on trying to smoke out low standards in the Fianna Fáil Party?

She is fully, 100% behind the Minister, Deputy O'Dea.

Does she support the concoction the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, gave to the House yesterday, of which the House has been given another version today? Sir, I put it to you that the House has no confidence in the Minister, Deputy O'Dea.

Deputy Hayes is clutching at straws.

As Deputy Kenny said, this is a pattern of behaviour——

——over many years. He has been found out for the fraud that he is.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

I compliment the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan. It is always a pleasure to watch a skilful lawyer defending the indefensible. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, dropped the ball. Not only that, he knocked it on. Every person in the Chamber can see his body language and that he does not believe one word from the Minister, Deputy O'Dea.

The Deputy should look back on what I said and show me any inaccuracies. I will listen with interest.

Let him speak for himself.

The Minister had his moment. The Greens spoke about principles. Marx spoke about principles also — Groucho Marx. He said not to worry about those ones, we have others. The Green Party has none.

We are trying to get this country out of its economic difficulties. We will continue to do that.

The Minister should be quiet.

The Chair should protect the speaker.

The Deputies opposite interrupted all the time.

We are here today as a result of the actions of the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, not Fine Gael. His actions against Councillor Maurice Quinlivan were slanderous. The Minister paid up because he was wrong. The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, got down in the political trench, picked up a ball of political mud and threw it at someone he considered to be an adversary. What has happened since then? Nothing more or less than a good old Irish-style cover up. Every person opposite will vote on the motion. They are voting for the continuation of the same old-style Irish politics that has been tarnished by Fianna Fáil for the past 25 years.

The Taoiseach said he would re-establish the primacy of this Chamber. They were his words. What we are seeing today is more of the same from the Bertie Ahern era that tarnished politics and every good Member of this House who works hard and does his or her best for the citizens of the State.

Let us remember another Minister in that position, namely, Ray Burke. We remember him drawing the line in the political sand and how he said no one should cross that line, and that he was telling the truth. He did not tell the truth. He lied, and so did the Minister, Deputy O'Dea. Shame on him. He has tarnished the Parliament, as always.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Joan Burton.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

The Labour Party will support the motion of no confidence in the Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea. We will oppose the motion that has been proposed by the Taoiseach.

The Labour Party has no confidence in the Government as a collective entity or in the Ministers in their individual capacities. This is the Fianna Fáil Government that has brought this country to the brink of economic ruin.

This is a Government that has allowed unemployment to climb to unprecedented levels and permitted emigration to return to levels not seen since the 1980s. This is a Government that has presided over massive job losses at Dell, in the constituency of the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, at Waterford Crystal and in many other plants without taking any meaningful action to try and save those jobs. This is a Government that failed to take the required action to save jobs at SR Technics and which has subsequently made such an absolute and utter mess of the offer by Ryanair to provide up to 500 highly skilled jobs at Dublin Airport.

This is a Fianna Fáil Government that remains totally indifferent in the face of a forecast from FÁS that the numbers out of work will increase by 87,000 in the coming year and a warning from the Irish Bank Officials' Association that as many as 10,000 jobs could be lost in the banking sector.

Deputy Gilmore is worrying about the banking sector very late in the day.

It did nothing to even try to save the jobs in Bank of Scotland-Ireland. This is a Fianna Fáil Government that has placed a financial millstone around the necks of not just the current generation of taxpayers, but of Irish taxpayers for generations to come. This is a Government that wrote a blank cheque for the banks when it agreed in as yet unexplained circumstances on the night of 30 September 2009 to provide a guarantee for the banks, exposing the taxpayer to a potential liability of €440 billion.

This is the Government that manoeuvred to avoid a full parliamentary inquiry into the banking crisis, and instead forced through a private, behind closed doors limited inquiry that specifically excludes the events of 30 September 2009 from its limited terms of reference. This is the Fianna Fáil Government that in every year of its record since 1997 has placed the interests of bankers and developers above those of the ordinary taxpayer. This is the Government that has handed over €4 billion to Anglo Irish Bank and another €7 billion to AIB and Bank of Ireland. This is the Government, led by a Taoiseach who has indicated he is prepared to write any cheque, no matter what the cost, to rescue the bankers.

This is a Fianna Fáil Government whose determination to leave no stone unturned to bail out the developers is in stark contrast to its indifference to the tens of thousands of families who are living in fear of losing their homes because the breadwinner has lost his or her job. This is the Fianna Fáil government that has failed to provide people with the decent health service they deserve. Only last week the Comptroller and Auditor General reported that there had been a major increase in the number of people waiting more than 12 hours in accident and emergency units for admission in the first five months of 2009 when compared to the same period in 2008.

This is the Fianna Fáil Government that has taken the unprecedented step of cutting the welfare payments of the blind, widows and those with disabilities. This is the Government that has cut the pay of poorly paid public servants on two occasions in the past year. Faced with the choice of taking some extra tax from super-high earners, or hitting those on welfare or low pay, there is never any real issue for this Fianna Fáil Government.

Let us make no mistake about it; this is a Fianna Fáil Government and it is a misnomer to refer to it as anything else. It is not a coalition government in any accepted sense of the term. We know from the revealing statements made by former Senator De Búrca that Fianna Fáil has little regard for the Green Party, that it can casually renege on agreements made and is quite prepared, in the phrase attributed to the Minister, Deputy Gormley, to shaft the Greens whenever necessary.

This is a deadbeat Government led by a Taoiseach who failed to live up to even the low expectations of his opponents and which is made up of Ministers who are demoralised, disenchanted and disillusioned. They have nothing to offer people other than more years of bungling and incompetence. The best service they could now offer to the people is to submit themselves to the verdict of the electorate; allow for a change of government and direction; give others the opportunity to undo the damage they have caused; and clear the way for the process of recovery and reconstruction to begin.

We will have the old Stickies in. Never.

The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, as a member of the Cabinet must accept his share of the responsibility for the economic damage and social destruction that Fianna Fáil has wrought on the people. However, it is another matter, of enormous importance and significance that has led to the tabling of this motion of no confidence in the Minister.

Leaving aside the broader issues I referred to, there are two reasons I believe the House should now express no confidence in the Minister, Deputy O'Dea. The first is that he made an absolutely scurrilous and unfounded allegation about a political opponent in his constituency, an allegation that he was subsequently forced to admit was totally and utterly without foundation. The second is that he swore an affidavit that contained a blatant untruth. What was the allegation made by the Minister against Councillor Quinlivan? In his interview with the Limerick Chronicle Mr. O’Dea claimed that Councillor Quinlivan was involved in some way in the operation of a brothel in Limerick. “Do you know the brothel they found in his name and in his brother’s name down in Clancy Strand”, he asked the journalist conducting the interview. It is difficult to think of a more serious, more scurrilous and more potentially damaging allegation that could be made against a political opponent.

During an election.

What about printing money?

In his personal explanation to the House last night, the Minister said, "I have never said that I lied on oath, as I was never on oath".

I did not say that.

However, an affidavit is sworn evidence, given on oath and is the equivalent of evidence given on oath in the witness box.

I did not say that.

My understanding is that any person making a sworn affidavit to the High Court must do so in the presence of a Commissioner for Oaths. The commissioner then reads over the affidavit to the person making it who will then be asked to either agree or disagree with its content. If one agrees with its content, one takes the Bible in one's right hand and swears to almighty God, or alternatively affirm, that the affidavit one has sworn is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

To the best of one's knowledge, information and belief.

The same rules of evidence must apply to everyone regardless of one's rank or position in Irish society.

The Minister wants us to examine his swearing a false affidavit only from the point where his barrister made an agreement with Councillor Quinlivan's barrister — an agreement duly reported to the court. Councillor Quinlivan's reasons for accepting an amount in damages and his costs in return for agreeing a settlement statement is entirely a matter for him. The issue that affects Deputy O'Dea's fitness to be a Minister is why he swore a false affidavit to the court in the first place, which caused the court to dismiss Mr. Quinlivan's application for an injunction to stop the Minister repeating his charge that Mr. Quinlivan was associated with running a brothel.

Deputy O'Dea swore he never made any such allegation. He maintained this position until the journalist to whom he had peddled this falsehood produced the tapes.

That is a very incorrect version. It is a twisted version.

It is twisted all right.

Faced with incontrovertible evidence the Minister asks us to believe that he acknowledged his error. He forgot. How could he forget creeping around Limerick alleging a rival candidate was running a brothel?

The journalist knows whether I knew I was being taped or not.

Is the Minister a member of the NUJ?

How could anyone forget making such a charge?

He will get his P45 next week.

Would any other Member stoop to making such a charge in the first place, if it were untrue? Is it acceptable behaviour for any Member, whether a Minister or not, to use a political campaign to slander a rival candidate and to implicate him in particularly grubby criminal behaviour?

There was no campaign.

Not only did Deputy O'Dea have no qualms about imputing criminal conduct to a political rival, he had no regard for the integrity of the journalist to whom he whispered his lies. Only when the journalist sought to defend his integrity by producing the tapes did the Minister remember his "mistake".

This is a distortion. This is typical stickie stuff. This is old stickie, Worker's Party stuff.

The only explanation for Deputy O'Dea forgetting that he called a rival a brothel keeper is that it is a pretty commonplace charge for him to make.

I am frankly amazed that the Taoiseach should seek to retain in Cabinet a man who wilfully committed perjury. If this happened in the neighbouring jurisdiction, a Cabinet Minister would not last until the end of the day. Deputy O'Dea is — as he is fond of telling us — a barrister and an officer of the court and he knows well the implications of swearing a false affidavit. Members of this House have ended up in the criminal courts for matters less grave than swearing a false affidavit. Loyalty can be an admirable quality but the Taoiseach's loyalty to Deputy O'Dea in this instance undermines any claims that he will enforce decent standards in his Government.

Having listened to the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, we can all now agree with former Senator de Búrca that she was right. The Green Party Ministers will dance to any and every Fianna Fáil tune. Is there anything that the two Green Ministers would not do to stay in office? The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources offered us a chronological description of what Deputy O'Dea said happened. Is the Green Party's new standard to parrot Deputy O'Dea's excuse? Where now are the high standards they called for so many times over the years?

I like the Green Party. I like its politics.

The Deputy is on his own.

Deputy Gilmore should look out behind him.

Why is that not an unfamiliar feeling? It is one thing for the Taoiseach not to take the Green Party seriously and he has them not just as passengers but as hitchhikers in Government.

The Taoiseach should stop humiliating them. I felt embarrassed for the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources whom the Taoiseach dragged into the House to say things he did not believe.

To serve in office is not humiliating. If the Deputy was in Government, he might see that. It is with pride that one represents the people in Government. One never sees it as a humiliating experience. It is an honour to serve in Government.

This is a disreputable chapter that will bring this House into disrepute if a majority in the House supports this kind of conduct by a Minister. What standards will apply in this House if a Minister can plead honest mistake because he supposedly forgot giving an interview connecting a political rival to brothel keeping?

Deputy O'Dea is not just any Minister. He has political responsibility for the Defence Forces which discharge certain security functions on behalf of the State. Deputy O'Dea was previously a Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and, if my memory serves me correctly, was on occasions delegated the full functions of the office when the senior Minister was out of the country.

For a day or so.

That was enough.

An allegation of having sworn a false affidavit would be a serious matter for any Minister. In the case of Deputy O'Dea the allegation is of such seriousness that it renders him unsuitable to hold the office he now occupies.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

I will quote from the transcript of the taped conversation for the benefit of those who may not have heard it. I wish, á la Richard Nixon, that Deputy O’Dea would agree to have the tape played because it must be extant.

It would be a best-seller if the Minister put it on the market.

Irish democracy deserves to hear the tenor and tone of the conversation, which was as follows:

"Willie O'Dea: . . .while occasionally we send out letters to planning applicants we have never been involved with anyone who shot anybody, or robbed banks, or kidnapped people. I suppose I'm going a bit too far when I say this but I'd like to ask Mr Quinlivan is the brothel still closed?"

Mike Dwane [the journalist]: Is the brothel still closed?

Willie O'Dea: Is the brothel still closed?

Mike Dwane: What brothel is that Willie?. . . "

The Minister remembers it. He is smiling fondly in recollection.

For what reason?

Will Deputy Burton get an Oscar for this refrain?

The transcript continues:

"Willie O'Dea: Do you know the brothel they found in his name and in his brother's name down in Clancy Strand?

Mike Dwane: I never heard about that.

Willie O'Dea: Did you not hear that? You better check your sources. There was a house owned by him that was rented out and they found two ladies of the night operating in there in the last couple of weeks".

Limerick's own Belle de Jour and Deputy O'Dea was familiar with it all.

At least he was not found in the brothel.

The transcript continues:

"Mike Dwane: Right. The other one I wanted to ask you about Willie was were you disappointed to see Noreen Ryan in the witness box?

Willie O'Dea: I don't want to talk about that..."

We should hear that tape because it would sound fantastic

It would be a best-seller.

I refer to Deputy O'Dea's affidavit sworn on oath. He states, "I most categorically and emphatically deny that I said to Mr Dwane that the plaintiff was a part-owner of said apartment. I did not at any time say to any other person that the plaintiff had any ownership of the apartment. Neither did I say at any time to any person that the plaintiff had any involvement in the operation of the brothel".

Perjury, pure and simple.

In the view of most people who understand ordinary language, not senior counsel such as the Minister or the Minister for Finance, that was a lie, an untruth or a misstatement on oath and not a mistake. People have been taught from a young age about making a statement under oath. One barrister and two solicitors are sitting on the Government benches and, given all their extensive legal education and training, they know the system of oaths is fundamental to our system of justice, however nice and charming a Minister is and however fond the Green Party Ministers are of him or her. I can understand why the Green Party members are fond of the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, and why they might have a good relationship with him. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Ryan, spoke as though there was a large peg on his nose, but obviously the Green Party members are fond of the Minister.

Oaths are fundamental to our system of justice. If people actually lie on oath it is a serious matter.

If they lie deliberately.

He is taking counsel from the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, now.

It is even more serious when it is done by a Government Minister who is also an officer of the court.

After that they can forget it.

Since Fianna Fáil returned to power in 2007, the economy has been destroyed and 60,000 people, most of them young, have emigrated. What are those young people who are left in the country, perhaps still in school, supposed to think about the standards of a Dáil in which a Minister can act as this Minister has done?

Everybody can make a mistake in life.

Everyone can make a statement that is misunderstood or wrongly taken up. That is why I wanted to read out what the Minister said to the journalist and what he then said in his affidavit. The commentary he made last night was along the lines of "I made an error, but I ‘fessed up and apologised". Most people understand and appreciate that. However, given the kind of politician he has been in terms of his tremendous ability to win the confidence of the people of Limerick and his experience as a Minister in a series of different offices at senior and junior level, it is impossible to believe that he could have forgotten something as detailed as this.

That is it. It is not credible.

I thank Deputy Burton for the compliment.

No one believes the Minister.

We understand that among Ministers in the Cabinet, the Minister for Defence is probably one of the more competent performers. I ask him not to try to tell us that his affidavit——

——was some kind of misstatement. It was not. It was in fact a conscious action on his part——

——to have the request for the injunction thrown out. We must bear in mind what was suggested by the Minister, Deputy Ryan, in his statement, although it is hard to hear a statement when the person making it has a big peg on his nose. From what I heard of the statement he read out at a gabble, he was suggesting that the fact that the settlement subsequently came before a judge was an indication that another court had somehow validated what the Minister had done. All the officers of the court opposite know that when a settlement goes before a judge, the judge receiving the settlement does not make any inquiries into affidavits or anything else; he or she is only concerned about receiving the settlement that was agreed between the parties.

The Green Party's fig leaf that the courts and a second judge somehow stood over what was done by the Minister is entirely invalid and misleading. If that is what the Green Party is relying on, Déirdre de Búrca really said it all when she left last week. Even at this late hour, the Green Party should give some further consideration to its position. It should do this for the sake of the children of Ireland, who will hear that these are the standards accepted in the House with the Green Party's stamp of approval. That is simply not good enough. This is dirty politics at its worst.

That is correct.

This is what happened years ago in places such as New Hampshire.

Gutter politics.

A Deputy

The Deputy would know all about that.

This is what the Americans used to call a particular type of politics which I will not name here.

The Deputy's time is expired.

In the United Kingdom, two senior politicians — Lord Archer and Jonathan Aitken — actually went to jail for perjury before a court. It was a different issue, but the point is none the less valid. In most jurisdictions an action of this kind by a serving senior Minister — in this case, one who has a responsibility, together with the President, for our Defence Forces — would be treated extremely seriously.

Deputy, your time is up.

The Minister, Deputy O'Dea's time is up.

His behaviour does, unfortunately, merit a vote of no confidence. It is shameful for the Green Party to support this action by the Minister, thereby saying to the children of Ireland that this type of behaviour is all right.

On behalf of the Sinn Féin Deputies, I oppose this motion of confidence in the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O'Dea. We have no confidence in the Minister and no confidence in this Government.

Dogged by the controversy, the Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government has swiftly introduced its own motion of confidence in the Minister. It is a desperate effort to head off the issue and reduce the length of time the Green Party Deputies will have to spend in the bunker they are currently occupying.

The Deputy has spent a bit of time in bunkers himself.

He knows all about bunkers.

The Taoiseach and his Fianna Fáil and Green Party colleagues in Government have further shredded their already tattered credibility by fully backing the Minister. They are parroting his ludicrous and blatantly false defence that this was a personal matter between him as a private citizen and another private citizen of Limerick.

In the Dáil yesterday the Taoiseach repeated this when he said: "The Minister was acting in his private capacity, not in pursuance of his ministerial duties."

He is an actor all right.

He went on to say:

. . . the Minister was acting in a private capacity. It was not in pursuance of his ministerial duties that this issue arose.

It is true that the Minister was acting. He was acting the maggot, as is his well-established inclination.

Let us take a look at the facts behind this story. They are, of course, totally different from the assertions made in the Taoiseach's vain attempt to dismiss the Minister's actions as something personal or unconnected to his political life and responsibilities. The Minister, who is a Deputy for Limerick East, was stung by a political charge from Mr. Maurice Quinlivan, then a Sinn Féin local government candidate, in the run-up to the June local and EU elections last year. The charge was that the Minister was wasting taxpayers' money by having at his disposal six civil servants to assist with his constituency work. This was a political — not a personal — charge. The charge was about the deployment of public money allocated to the Minister's office, and concerned the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, in his capacity as a Deputy and in his ministerial role.

The Minister chose to respond in a most scurrilous, despicable and personal way by falsely and outrageously linking Maurice Quinlivan to the operation of a brothel in Limerick city. The Minister is a political animal and has one of the highest personal votes in the country. That must be acknowledged. He knew very well what he was doing, even though his tongue often runs ahead of his brain. He was trying to prevent an electoral breakthrough by Sinn Féin and Maurice Quinlivan in Limerick City, which the Minister regards as his territory — his Fianna Fáil fiefdom.

The Minister, Deputy O'Dea, should realise this is no laughing matter.

Even if one were to accept the Minister's original affidavit to the High Court, which he admitted was false, the Minister would still have a serious case to answer because of his false allegations that were published in the Limerick Chronicle — not to mention the even more serious charges which were not published but which he did utter and which were recorded on tape. This was totally inappropriate conduct for any Member of the Oireachtas, let alone a Cabinet Minister.

In his so-called personal explanation to the Dáil yesterday, the Minister maintained the charade that the matter was personal. He claimed: "The matter was a personal one between me and a Sinn Féin representative in Limerick." It was as if it was a row between business rivals or a falling out between neighbours. People should examine the Minister's comments last evening. In the same paragraph as that claim, the Minister contradicted himself when he said it was "born out of heated political exchanges". Therefore, the matter was clearly in the political domain.

The Minister, the Taoiseach and the rest are contradicted by the Minister's own mouth in his original affidavit to the High Court, which began:

"I am a sitting Teachta Dála for the constituency of Limerick East and I am also [a] Government Minister. I make this Affidavit from facts within my own knowledge."

I did not know the Deputy recognised the courts.

The Minister in his affidavit defended his allegation concerning the brothel. He asserted: "I say and believe that I was fully entitled to raise this issue in my capacity as an elected public representative to whom enquiries and concerns about the existence of this brothel had been expressed by a number of constituents."

Was it by the Garda?

Let there be no pretence that this was a personal matter and that Deputy O'Dea was acting as anything other than a Deputy and a Minister. Everyone knows that he is the face of the Government in Limerick and the entire mid-west region.

Faced with this outrageous defamation, Maurice Quinlivan sought an injunction in the High Court to prevent the Minister from repeating his false statements. The Minister then swore the now infamous false affidavit. Mr. Justice Cooke in the High Court accepted the affidavit and, on the basis of the Minister's lie, refused the injunction application from Maurice Quinlivan. That decision was made on 20 April. From then until the local elections on 9 June and afterwards, Maurice Quinlivan had the Minister's false accusation hanging over him. Many believed that, since Maurice had lost the application for a High Court injunction, he had lost the action for defamation. Despite this, he succeeded in being elected to Limerick City Council for Sinn Féin, a testament to his and his party's hard work on behalf of the people of Limerick and a sign also that the Minister had no credibility among the electorate in attacking Maurice's character.

The Minister subsequently changed his story when the tape recording of his interview was revealed. However, the damage had been done during an election, as was clearly intended from the outset. It was only in December that Maurice succeeded in his defamation case. The Minister was forced to withdraw his comments and to apologise. He claimed in his personal explanation last evening that he corrected the mistake when he realised it. That is stretching credibility, since it took him four months to do so. I do not believe the Minister when he says that he forgot he made the defamatory remarks. Not a chance.

There is a great deal Deputy Ó Caoláin says that I do not believe either.

He has abused the democratic system and the courts and should resign. His continuing defence of the indefensible and the efforts of his Fianna Fáil and Green Party colleagues clearly underscore the fact that his position is untenable, as is that of the Government.

That is hypocrisy of the highest order.

A Deputy

The Minister of State would know about that.

What of social welfare fraud?

These are the facts, but he is not happy facing them. Much has been made by the Minister and the Taoiseach of the terms of the settlement in the defamation action on 21 December as if they exonerate the Minister. They do no such thing. Clearly, Maurice Quinlivan accepted the legal advice he was given, having secured the vindication of his good name and the withdrawal by the Minister of the latter's false and defamatory statements. The matter of the false affidavit sworn to the High Court in the earlier injunction has not yet been considered by any court.

The Minister must also answer to the people in his role as a public officeholder who is supposed to be a servant of the people and to uphold the highest standards in all matters. How can the people have confidence in a Cabinet Minister who has acted in this way? How can the people of Limerick have confidence in such a Minister who has also presided over record unemployment in the mid-west region and the virtual collapse of the long-promised Limerick regeneration? How can the people have confidence in a Government that, like yesterday, attempts to defend the indefensible? We certainly have no confidence in this Government and we want to see all of its members, including Deputy O'Dea, turfed out of office.

We may all need to wait for the Green Party, with respect to the Minister, Deputy Ryan, whose entrance into the Chamber was the most reluctant that I have witnessed in a long time. He skipped off quickly, but seems to have been sent back in again, by whom only goodness knows, as he needed to return to his seat.

They called him back.

It was not a bulb that went off in his head outside in the corridor. Someone told him to get back in there and to stick his ass back in his seat. That is what he has had to do.

Maybe he was reluctant to watch someone get a punishment beating.

Did the Minister swear any other affidavits?

We must wait until the Green Party Members are eventually smoked out of the political bunker in which they are hiding or until someone on the backbenches——

The Deputy has bunkers on his brain. It is a Freudian slip.

——of Fianna Fáil finds a conscience and speaks out regarding this outrageous matter.

Will Deputy Ferris tell the Deputy that Sinn Féin closed the bunkers?

They have been filled in with concrete.

Otherwise, our unfortunate country will have much more to undergo if Fianna Fáil and the Green Party are allowed to continue to the bitter end of their term of office.

For the record, no length of time after a recent directive from the office of the Ceann Comhairle concerning appropriate language by Members of this House, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Dermot Ahern, was in direct contravention of same when he charged Deputy Kenny, the leader of the Fine Gael Party, with the word "guttersnipe".

I could do worse to Deputy Ó Caoláin.

(Interruptions).

That was one of the words that he was told was not acceptable.

Deputy, in your case, I could go much farther.

Minister, please.

It is absolutely typical of what the Minister will resort to.

It is not only Deputy O'Dea. The Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, can add himself to the whole mish mash this afternoon.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

It is your——

The Minister can throw all the muck he likes.

In the Deputy's case, I could throw much worse.

(Interruptions).

Minister, will you resume your seat, please?

The Minister is not at a cumann meeting now.

Will the Minister——

Deputy Ferris, please.

(Interruptions).

Did the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, swear any further affidavits?

I will come to that in a minute. Last night, I stood before the House to refute the baseless, cynical and malicious allegations that have been made against me in recent days by Members of the parties opposite.

Deputies

Speak up.

No sooner had I reached the end of my statement than Deputy Kenny was on his feet declaring that Fine Gael would table a motion of no confidence in me.

It is Fine Gael, not "fine" Gael.

The Minister is not writing for the Sunday Independent now.

Fine Gael had decided this before it had heard a word of what I had to say.

(Interruptions).

We are not "fine" Gael. We are Fine Gael.

Please, could we hear the Minister?

It is a classic example of the ready, aim, fire school of political tactics that has become Deputy Kenny's stock in trade.

Willie get your gun.

As Deputy Kenny stated, Fine Gael's tabling of a motion of no confidence has nothing to do with what I said or did last April or December.

Did the Minister swear any other affidavits that were false? Does he have any other court cases for which he wants to apologise.

Deputy Creed, please.

The fact that my opposite number on the Fine Gael benches has not contributed to this debate would indicate to me that this has nothing to do with my work as the Minister for Defence.

Let us have silence otherwise we will not be able to hear the new lies.

Rather it has to do with Deputy Kenny's recent declaration to his parliamentary party in the aftermath of the George Lee debacle that "what I'm going to do now is be myself."

Will the Minister apologise for any other perjury?

Did the Minister ever find out who owns the brothel?

Am I entitled to make my statement; yes or no?

The Minister should not concern himself with Fine Gael.

I ask Deputies Barrett and McGinley to restrain themselves.

Why does the Ceann Comhairle not tell the Members opposite to be orderly?

I am doing that as well.

There is one-way traffic on this.

All I can say is that whoever advised Deputy Kenny to be himself could not have given him worse advice.

The Minister was obviously seeing himself.

The proof of this is that the case was settled in the High Court on 21 December——

Will the Minister write about that next Sunday?

——but it has taken until now — two months later — for Deputy Kenny to decide that this is a matter that, in his own words, he believes "goes to the very heart of the standards, judgment and ethics displayed at the top of this Government". It is not as if he could not have known about the case and my apology. It was widely reported in the media on 21 December and 22 December.

Will the Minister give us a run down on that next Sunday?

One of Deputy Kenny's Senators issued a statement on the day the case was finalised in court, yet Deputy Kenny did not regard it as going to the very heart of anything at that point. On 2 February Senator Regan raised the allegations in Seanad Éireann but again Deputy Kenny did not regard it as going to the very heart of anything.

This is incredible stuff.

Deputy Kenny reminds me of the famous quotation about Henry James — that he has a mind so fine that no idea could violate it.

The Minister knows a lot about him.

In Deputy Kenny's case, he has a brilliant mind until he makes it up.

The Minister is walking a fine line.

Is that Henry James or Jesse James?

This motion is about the Minister.

He should stop digging; this is about the Minister and telling lies.

What we are witnessing since the departure of the former Deputy George Lee back to a career in television is the opening performance of the new improved "Enda Kenny Show". It is more a sitcom than a documentary and like most sitcoms it is destined to be cancelled early in the season.

I do not expect any of the Deputies opposite in the Fine Gael Party——

Did the Minister swear any other false affidavits in any other court cases?

Deputy Creed, please desist.

It would not be reasonable to expect them to vote confidence in me when they find it so hard to vote confidence in their own leader.

Did the Minister swear any other false affidavits? He is in confession and he should tell us about all the other false affidavits?

Let me remind the House of the actual and verifiable facts that I placed on the record of the House last night. The settlement that was agreed before the High Court and which was finalised in proceedings of 21 December contained this key paragraph: "It is not suggested by Mr. Quinlivan that Mr. O'Dea acted other than innocently in making such denial and he accepts that there was no intention to mislead on the part of Mr. O'Dea."

That was after he got the money.

He took the money and ran.

I have openly and fully acknowledged that my recollection of some of what I said in the interview with the journalist as described in my original affidavit was mistaken. I corrected the mistake on the day, not four months later. On the day I realised it, I corrected the mistake. I admitted the mistake and apologised for it.

I have never denied saying what was reported in the The Limerick Chronicle. I knew I had made the remarks reported in the newspaper but I honestly did not recollect going further. My genuine and honest mistake relates specifically to remarks — this is important — that were not published in the newspaper at all, which I honestly did not recall making.

The Minister lied to this House just as comfortably and he lied to the court. He is a disgrace.

To put it in context, the remarks concerned an apartment owned by Brixton prison escapee Nessan Quinlivan — who shot his way out of Brixton prison——

What has that got to do with it?

——in the company of one of Jerry McCabe's murderers — which was being used as a brothel.

Were they not let out of jail early?

Nessan Quinlivan is a brother of councillor Maurice Quinlivan.

Was it not the Minister who let them out of jail early?

Can Members allow the Minister to speak without interruption?

The information I had at the time from good sources was that Mr. Maurice Quinlivan was involved as well.

The Minister did a deal to get them out of jail early.

That information was incorrect.

A secret deal was done to let them out of jail early.

We do not want to hear any more of this rubbish.

When I later saw a transcript of the interview in which I had, contrary to my recollection, gone further than what had been quoted in the newspaper——

This has nothing to do with the sworn affidavit, the false affidavit.

——and having seen the transcript, I took the initiative. I went to my solicitor and immediately corrected my affidavit. I was not forced or pressed to do this. I did so of my own volition as I then knew that my original affidavit was incorrect.

The Minister was caught.

Deputy Kehoe, please.

Can the Minister be allowed continue without interruption?

I am dealing with this. I was not, as Fine Gael has asserted, found out by the production of a tape recording of my interview. Its members have been insinuating that as if the interview had been recorded without my knowledge. I knew it was being recorded as there was a cassette recorder clearly in front of me.

Of course, the Minister did, that made it worse.

He thought he would get away with it.

It is not the slightest bit credible that I would swear an incorrect——

The Minister thought he would get away with it.

——-affidavit of a conversation that I knew had been taped when there was a tape in existence in the possession of a journalist. I ask this question of the media——

The Minister is fond of them himself.

——a minority of whom have been putting out comment masquerading as fact. There is a witness to the interview, namely, the journalist concerned. Why has he not been asked whether I knew the interview was being recorded? Has anybody bothered to ask the journalist who did the interview to see if a tape suddenly appeared or if I knew that the interview was being recorded?

(Interruptions).

The Minister is free to answer questions.

Deputy Durkan, allow the Minister to continue without interruption.

The facts do not suit.

I have a question.

I am not answering any questions. I declared the error.

The Minister is afraid to answer questions.

It was not discovered or uncovered by anybody else. I saw my own mistake.

Why did the Minister not talk to the journalists?

Am I going to be allowed to make my statement?

The Minister is afraid to answer questions.

This is a motion of confidence in me. Will I be allowed make my statement without interruption?

(Interruptions).

Deputy Kehoe, please.

I declared the error. It was not discovered or uncovered by anyone else. I saw my own mistake — I brought it to the attention of others. I admitted my error and I paid the price.

The Minister did it his way.

He will pay the price all right.

Now Fine Gael wants me to pay a double price. It wants to remove me from office for openly admitting, owning up and remedying a mistake I made to the satisfaction of the aggrieved party.

He will be removed from office for perjury.

He told lies regarding Longford barracks as well.

If Fine Gael and Deputy Kenny's idea of standards, judgment and ethics is to punish those who admit honest mistakes, then that is one more reason many decent and law abiding people who should fear the prospect of Enda Kenny ever becoming Taoiseach.

There will not be a law abiding perjurer at that table.

Who is the Minister to talk?

As I pointed out last night, evidence and testimony——

There will not be a perjurer at that table.

Is the Cheann Comhairle——

Yes, I am doing the best I can.

The Chair will need to get a tape recorded for the Minister.

This is turning into the comedy club.

As I pointed out last night, evidence and testimony is regularly corrected in courts without allegations and assertions of lying and perjury being levelled.

Imagine that this is going on the record of the House.

People in all walks of life have been obliged to correct testimony whether in written and oral form. However, there is a principle that he who comes looking for justice should come with clean hands. How clean are Fine Gael's hands when it comes to owning up to its mistakes?

There is a dispenser outside the door.

Let us remember that this is the same Fine Gael party that deliberately suppressed a document from the Moriarty tribunal.

This is a Minister who told lies to the people of Longford.

Deputy Bannon, please.

It is also the party that destroyed its own financial records. The information it failed to give to the Moriarty tribunal was about a $50,000 donation it received from the Norwegian telecommunications company, Telenor.

What has that got to do with a brothel?

Fine Gael's general secretary said that the party had decided not to report the donation to the Moriarty tribunal — and note the word "decided" ——

What about the Minister's former leader?

Deputy Kehoe, please.

——because it would have been "politically disastrous", although he attempted afterwards to take back the words "politically disastrous".

What a performance.

He said that he feared that if the donation was revealed, a connection might be made between Fine Gael and the granting of a mobile telephone licence to Esat Digifone, about which we will discover an awful lot more shortly.

The Minister has lost it now.

The Fine Gael leader at the time of the donation, Mr. John Bruton, brushed the matter aside with the extraordinary excuse that he probably had not informed himself as fully as he should have about the matter. It is all right for him to make a mistake and at the time and since then Deputy Kenny——-

(Interruptions).

I request Members for the few minutes remaining to restrain themselves and not engage in silly behaviour.

It is called free speech. I know the Blueshirts do not have much of a concept of it but it is called free speech.

A Deputy

Touché .

The Minister is using strong words now.

The Fine Gael Leader——

I suppose we are running brothels as well, are we?

I see the Minister is wearing a blue shirt.

Does the Deputy believe in free speech?

Does the Minister believe in honesty?

He might let me make my statement during the next few minutes. How he can call himself a democrat is beyond me.

How can the Minister call himself a democrat with this rubbish?

Deputy Kehoe, please.

The then Fine Gael Leader, Mr. John Bruton, brushed the matter aside with the extraordinary excuse——

He is not a liar.

——-that he probably had not informed himself as fully as he should have. So he is entitled to make a mistake. He is entitled to suppress a document——

He is not a liar.

——on the basis that it might be politically disastrous to his party.

We accept that was a mistake. However, such omissions and errors are not the sole preserve of Fine Gael. It is not so long ago that Sinn Féin in the person of Deputy Arthur Morgan was denying that suspected paedophile, Liam Adams, was a member of the Sinn Féin Party in Louth——

The Minister is misleading the House, I did not say that.

——dismissing his involvement as being "peripheral"——

I said it was not in the office——

——and indeed continuing with this line until former members of the party started to produce photos and documentation showing that Liam Adams was anything but peripheral but——

The Minister is again misleading the House in the same way as----

——when this fact emerged into the public domain, Deputy Morgan's explanation was that he had a lapse of memory.

I checked the record and I put the record straight. The Minister should withdraw that comment.

At the beginning of this debate the Taoiseach set out what we have achieved in the Department of Defence in recent years. He also set out the dearth of new ideas and new policies on defence coming from Fine Gael. I have a job to do as Minister for Defence.

Closing the barracks.

To defend your seat.

I am committed to doing that work and will not be dissuaded from doing my job by politically motivated accusations from the parties opposite. I have spent almost 30 years of my adult life as a Deputy and have been proud of the work I have done for the people of Limerick. I am proud to have represented them in Dáil Éireann.

Is the Minister proud of what he has done in this case?

I value my good name and reputation.

That is up for auction.

Whatever about our political differences, the people of Limerick respect my good name and reputation as an open and accessible public representative.

What about some respect for the truth?

I do not expect any praise from the benches opposite but I do not think it unreasonable to expect some level of propriety and fairness.

Low standards in high places.

It seems I am wrong to even expect that.

Here comes the praise.

There is no round of applause today.

The Deputy should keep his hair on.

That concludes the contributions on the motion of confidence in the Minister for Defence. I am now obliged to put the question as it is approaching 5.15 p.m. Standing Order 71 provides that a list vote through the lobbies is the appropriate way of taking a vote of confidence in the Government and I consider that a vote of confidence in a Minister is of such import that I should exercise my discretion to have a full list vote on this item.

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 80; Níl, 69.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Andrews, Barry.
  • Andrews, Chris.
  • Ardagh, Seán.
  • Aylward, Bobby.
  • Behan, Joe.
  • Blaney, Niall.
  • Brady, Áine.
  • Brady, Cyprian.
  • Brady, Johnny.
  • Browne, John.
  • Byrne, Thomas.
  • Calleary, Dara.
  • Carey, Pat.
  • Collins, Niall.
  • Conlon, Margaret.
  • Connick, Seán.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Cowen, Brian.
  • Cregan, John.
  • Cuffe, Ciarán.
  • Cullen, Martin.
  • Curran, John.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Devins, Jimmy.
  • Dooley, Timmy.
  • Finneran, Michael.
  • Fitzpatrick, Michael.
  • Fleming, Seán.
  • Flynn, Beverley.
  • Gogarty, Paul.
  • Gormley, John.
  • Grealish, Noel.
  • Hanafin, Mary.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Healy-Rae, Jackie.
  • Hoctor, Máire.
  • Kelleher, Billy.
  • Kelly, Peter.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kennedy, Michael.
  • Killeen, Tony.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • Lenihan, Brian.
  • Lenihan, Conor.
  • McEllistrim, Thomas.
  • McGrath, Mattie.
  • McGrath, Michael.
  • McGuinness, John.
  • Mansergh, Martin.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • Moloney, John.
  • Moynihan, Michael.
  • Mulcahy, Michael.
  • Nolan, M. J.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
  • O’Brien, Darragh.
  • O’Connor, Charlie.
  • O’Dea, Willie.
  • O’Donoghue, John.
  • O’Flynn, Noel.
  • O’Hanlon, Rory.
  • O’Keeffe, Batt.
  • O’Keeffe, Edward.
  • O’Rourke, Mary.
  • O’Sullivan, Christy.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Roche, Dick.
  • Ryan, Eamon.
  • Scanlon, Eamon.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Wallace, Mary.
  • White, Mary Alexandra.
  • Woods, Michael.

Níl

  • Allen, Bernard.
  • Bannon, James.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Breen, Pat.
  • Broughan, Thomas P.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Burke, Ulick.
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Byrne, Catherine.
  • Carey, Joe.
  • Clune, Deirdre.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Coonan, Noel J.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coveney, Simon.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Creighton, Lucinda.
  • D’Arcy, Michael.
  • Deasy, John.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • Doyle, Andrew.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • English, Damien.
  • Feighan, Frank.
  • Ferris, Martin.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Hayes, Brian.
  • Hayes, Tom.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Hogan, Phil.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Kehoe, Paul.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Lynch, Ciarán.
  • Lynch, Kathleen.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McEntee, Shane.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McHugh, Joe.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Olivia.
  • Morgan, Arthur.
  • Naughten, Denis.
  • Noonan, Michael.
  • Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
  • Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
  • O’Donnell, Kieran.
  • O’Dowd, Fergus.
  • O’Mahony, John.
  • O’Shea, Brian.
  • O’Sullivan, Jan.
  • Penrose, Willie.
  • Perry, John.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Reilly, James.
  • Ring, Michael.
  • Shatter, Alan.
  • Sheahan, Tom.
  • Sherlock, Seán.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Stanton, David.
  • Timmins, Billy.
  • Tuffy, Joanna.
  • Upton, Mary.
  • Varadkar, Leo.
  • Wall, Jack.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Níl, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Top
Share