Brendan Howlin
Question:1. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on Brexit last met and next plans to meet. [4130/17]
Ceisteanna - Questions
Brexit Issues
Gerry Adams
Question:2. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the all-island civic dialogue since its first plenary meeting on 2 November 2016. [4581/17]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:3. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on Brexit last met; and when it will next meet. [5816/17]
Gerry Adams
Question:4. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on Brexit is due to be held. [5892/17]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
The all-island civic dialogue plenary meeting, which I hosted on 2 November, was an important element in the Government's preparations to meet the broad range of challenges posed by Brexit. To strengthen our engagement further the Government launched a series of sectoral all-island dialogue events. Led by Ministers, these sessions provided an invaluable opportunity to hear directly the implications of Brexit in each sector, including on an all-island basis.
To date, 11 all-island sectoral dialogues have been hosted by Ministers throughout the country, attended by almost 1,000 industry and civic society representatives from across the island. Dialogues have been held on further education and training, agrifood, education and research, transport and logistics, tourism and hospitality, schools, children and young people, jobs, enterprise and innovation, seafood, energy, and heritage, culture and rural Ireland. Three further all-island sectoral dialogues will take place over the coming weeks on pensions, social welfare rights and social insurance, human rights and the Good Friday Agreement, and on agriculture and forestry. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Flanagan and I will host the second session of the all-island civic dialogue in Dublin Castle on Friday 17 February. This will build on the sectoral consultation process and provide a further opportunity for the Government to engage with, and hear the views of, those most directly affected.
The Cabinet committee on Brexit last met on 26 January and will continue to meet regularly to deal with Brexit related issues. While a date has not been set for the next meeting, it will take place in the very near future.
The deferred reply under Standing Order 42A was forwarded to the Deputies.
My question relates to the Cabinet committee on Brexit. Further to the point I raised the last time we discussed these matters, has the Taoiseach sought Ireland's participation in the Barnier oversight group? On the last occasion I suggested that because of the unique impact of Brexit on Ireland, we should seek the chairmanship of that oversight group. I understand that the position has now gone to a Belgian civil servant. Does Ireland, at the least, have membership of the oversight group? If we do, who is on that committee to represent us?
I understand the Taoiseach is bringing a memo to Government next week on the issue of the Border and Brexit. Will the Taoiseach indicate to the House what exactly is envisaged in this paper and in broad terms what he might be telling the Cabinet? As I have said, the view last week of the frictionless Border as envisaged by the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom seems to be unobtainable if one listens to Mr. Lux, the former head of customs within the European Union.
I will bring a memo to Government about the implications of Brexit, which will go beyond the specific issue raised by Deputy Howlin. We need to look at where our country is headed for the next five, ten and 20 years. That has implications in terms of Cabinet review of capital expenditure. There are the implications of the public consultation under way by the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, about what Ireland will be like in 2040 with an extra one million people, where they will live and work, how they will be transported from place to place and what kind of Ireland we are going to have. On Deputy Howlin's specific question, I will bring a memo to Government on Tuesday. I will make a statement on Wednesday and we will have the second all-island civic dialogue on Friday. I made the point very clearly to-----
Will the Taoiseach be making a statement in the House on Wednesday?
Mr. Barnier's task force is very active. It is very well aware that one of the four priorities mentioned by him is specifically to deal with Northern Ireland and the implications of the current Border situation. I have made this perfectly clear to the British Government. Ireland is not going back to a situation where we have customs posts etc. on the hard Border. I have made the point that this would have serious consequences for us and could, without being any way alarmist about it, bring a return of some things that we do not want to ever see again in this country.
Could the Taoiseach clarify the situation regarding the Barnier oversight group?
Yes. We have an Irish person on that. They are all public servants-----
Who is on it?
I forget the name, but I will forward it to the Deputy. The Barnier task force does not make decisions, it makes recommendations, and oversight politically is with the European Council.
The sectoral engagements are a very important part of the all-island civic dialogue. Indeed, the Taoiseach used the phrase "all-island" half a dozen times in his response to an Teachta Howlin. However, as far as I know, none of the sectoral meetings has taken place in the North, which is very disappointing. The Taoiseach indicated a meeting would be held in Newry, which I communicated to a lot of people in the town. Instead, the meeting took place in my constituency of Louth. I note an upcoming meeting on human rights and the Good Friday Agreement will take place in Kildare. Why can that meeting not be held in Derry, Enniskillen or Belfast? Why has the Taoiseach taken what is clearly a policy decision not to hold meetings in the North? Will that gap be filled?
The British Government White Paper on Brexit was published last week and contains many of the platitudes we have heard from the Taoiseach and Prime Minister May. It even refers to "the strength and support of 65 million people willing us to make it [Brexit] happen". Of course, both the Tory Government and the Taoiseach's Government are ignoring the majority remain vote in the North. The White Paper also claims the devolved Administrations are fully engaged in preparations to leave the EU. Leaving aside our own position in the North, we know from the devolved Administrations in Scotland and Wales this is not the case. When will the Government publish a White Paper setting out its strategy and objectives for the Brexit negotiations? The Taoiseach said he will make a speech on this, but I would like to know when we will see a White Paper.
As everybody is aware, there is an election coming up in Northern Ireland. I do not want to be accused in any way of interfering with the electoral process by holding meetings throughout the North on the implications of Brexit for the Northern economy and North-South relations. That is a valid concern. There was an intention to hold a meeting in Newry, as the Deputy noted, but it was instead held in Dundalk. I assure the Deputy there is no wish not to have meetings in Northern Ireland, but I do respect there is an election process ongoing there.
I pointed out to Deputy Adams last week that at the meeting in Cardiff between the Prime Minister and the devolved assemblies, a plan for Scotland was presented by First Minister Sturgeon and a plan for Wales was presented by First Minister Jones, but no plan was presented for Northern Ireland. The Deputy's party is in the happy position that it does not have any responsibility at the moment because the Executive has collapsed. Instead, he can blame the British Government and the Irish Government, which is what he does.
We will blame the Taoiseach.
However, the Deputy's party in Northern Ireland will presumably have to be in a position to work with whatever the people of the North decide in the election.
The Taoiseach will have to do the same.
I hope it will be possible to put together an Executive out of the Assembly elections whose leaders will come together in the way former First Minister and deputy First Minister, Ms Foster and Mr. McGuinness, did, after some difficulties, at least to point in the same direction and have a certain set of objectives for Northern Ireland. We do not have any of that now. I hope the Deputy can confirm he will work assiduously with whatever is the result of the Northern Ireland election to have an Assembly and Executive that will quickly work together to present agreed objectives and a plan for Northern Ireland's future beyond Brexit. That is where we need to be.
I have three points to make. First, people are effectively seeking to outdo each other in this House, among almost all the political parties, in claiming to be the most opposed to a hard Border. There is a constant exercise in outflanking and claims of being more concerned than anybody else about the impact of Brexit. Should we not, instead of playing politics with all of this, conclude that since nobody wants a return to a hard Border, we will simply put our foot down and say there will be no such return because we will not allow it? Ironically, it is the great internationalists in the European Union who most want to impose a hard Border. Their internationalism ends at the borders of Europe. My internationalism, on the other hand, goes way beyond the borders of Europe, whether in respect of the movement of people or goods. If the Taoiseach is serious about internationalism and democracy, he should say to his EU colleagues that we will not accept the imposition of hard borders or anything else that will impede the free movement of human beings and trade.
The Deputy is over time.
I will be brief.
Very brief.
The Ceann Comhairle has thrown me and I have forgotten the other points I wished to make.
The Deputy can save himself for the next group of questions.
Has the Taoiseach reflected on the potential, in the context of the structure of the peace process and the Belfast Agreement, for the development of a separate strand, among several strands, to deal with the issue of North-South relations on this island? Such a proposal was put forward by a former leader of the Labour Party and Tánaiste at the time, Dick Spring. It would serve the Taoiseach and the Irish position very well given our uniquely intertwined trade and other relationships with the UK and the issues between North and South. Will the Taoiseach consult on this proposal and give it due consideration?
Will the Taoiseach confirm that the person representing the Government on the team led by Michel Barnier, the EU's chief Brexit negotiator, is a civil servant from the Republic of Ireland? Is that person a diplomat or trade expert, male or female? Will Taoiseach tell us who the person is and what previous position he or she has held in public or other service in this State?
The British White Paper on Brexit that was published last week contains no clear blueprint for EU-UK relations and includes a range of contradictory objectives. However, there is more detail in it than in anything published by our Government thus far in respect of Ireland-UK relations. In an article published yesterday on RTE's website concerning the status of Ireland in the Brexit negotiations, Tony Connelly, drawing on his impressive range of contacts in Brussels, presents a picture that should cause alarms to go off. He says there is widespread acceptance of Ireland's difficult position but also growing annoyance at our failure to make concrete proposals. One source, he states, said: "Ireland has to start proposing solutions." That is exactly what we have been saying in this House in recent months. We appreciate there is a lot of activity going on, particularly at the level of officials, but we have no evidence whatsoever that the Government has developed specific proposals for dealing with the many diverse issues arising, with the only exception, perhaps, being in regard to the common travel area. Does the Government intend to publish a White Paper setting out a coherent set of objectives for the Brexit negotiations?
To answer Deputy Martin's question first, I will set all of that out in a speech I intend to make next Wednesday.
Deputy Boyd Barrett said he wished to raise three points but only raised one.
I was flummoxed by the Ceann Comhairle.
The Deputy is the best person to outdo anybody else in here when he gets the chance. I remind him that the agreement between the Irish Government and the British Government is that there be no return to a hard Border or the borders of the past, however one wants to put it. That is an agreed position between the two Governments. Now it is about making it happen. All of this is an outcome of a vote by the UK electorate.
Deputy Burton made an important point. We have the all-island sectoral discussions and the first plenary session was assisted by everybody, including most of the political parties. The second plenary will take place on 17 February. Out of that may well come a basis for talking about a specific North-South strand, as referred to by the Deputy. Our economies, North and South, are very much intertwined. The Deputy asked for details of the official who is on the Barnier committee. I do not know the name but I will supply that information to the Deputy.
Does that imply the Taoiseach has not met that person?
That person's job-----
The Taoiseach has not met that person. He or she is our own official on the committee.
Deputy Burton has asked her question.
That person's job is to be at the occasions where the Barnier task force is doing its work and we become aware of that. As I said, the Barnier task force will not make any decisions. That is a function of the European Council, which will oversee that politically. I can confirm to the Deputy that the Barnier task force regards the Border and Northern Ireland as one of its top priorities and is proceeding on that.
On Deputy Micheál Martin's point, a raft of detailed options have been gone through in all the sectors I have already mentioned. The point I referred to in response to questions yesterday on the Lancaster House speech made by the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May, where she stated the United Kingdom has "no preconceived position" in respect of the customs union, is a particularly important issue because it will determine the nature of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union from where Ireland will continue to negotiate. We have agreed on common travel. That also includes welfare, labour and residency issues, and North-South and east- west issues. We have agreed on the fact that one does not have a traditional border there. It is how one makes these things happen that is important.
All right, we have to move on.
I will set out the detail of that on Wednesday next. I will try to answer any questions arising from that.
Cabinet Committee Meetings
Eamon Ryan
Question:5. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, environment and climate action will take place. [4168/17]
Gerry Adams
Question:6. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, environment and climate action last met. [5743/17]
Micheál Martin
Question:7. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, environment and climate action will next meet. [5764/17]
Brendan Howlin
Question:8. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on infrastructure, environment and climate action will take place; and the persons that attend. [6039/17]
I was glad to attend the event in Maynooth.
Hold on.
The Taoiseach has to answer it first.
Deputy Eamon Ryan is away.
The Taoiseach answers first.
Deputy Eamon Ryan is out with the gun like Usain Bolt up there.
It is the first time I have seen someone answer a Taoiseach before he has replied and thanking him for his reply.
Deputy Eamon Ryan took off like Usain Bolt.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 8, inclusive, together.
The Cabinet committee on infrastructure, environment and climate action last met on 30 January 2017. It is due to meet again later this month. The committee addresses the climate change challenge in terms of domestic policy and in respect of Ireland's EU and international obligations. In addition, the committee drives the development and delivery of key infrastructure and associated policy, including oversight of relevant commitments in the programme for Government. I chair the Cabinet committee and the membership is comprised of the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality; the Minister for Finance; the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government; the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform; the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment; the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine; the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport; the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs; and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade.
I thank the Taoiseach for his response.
I attended the event of the launch of the national planning framework last week in Maynooth. I agreed with much of what the Taoiseach said about the need for the State to prepare and have a vision for the future, and to start taking the technological changes that are happening and advance them, and be in the lead, and create employment, create prosperity and create a better society in that process, but when it comes to the issue of climate change, nothing is happening in the State.
The briefing notes on the climate mitigation plan came out last week and there is nothing new in it. There is no ambition.
Increasingly, all the analysis internationally is mentioning Ireland as a laggard. We are mentioned in the same breath as Poland. That is how bad it is now, internationally. We are one of only two countries which will not meet their 2020 climate targets. A report last week by the European Union states we will not meet our renewables targets. It will cost us a fortune, not only in fines but in missing out on the economic opportunity.
Following the national climate dialogue where the environmental community went to a previous climate meeting and presented a host of innovative initiatives as to how one could get dialogue going, they have heard nothing back. All we hear about is maybe some schools programme and some regional meetings - no ambition.
None of what the Taoiseach stated at the launch of the national planning framework about what we need to do is happening on climate. The whole system is effectively saying, "Do nothing, wait ten years and see what happens to the rest of the world and then we might do something." That is a big mistake.
Deputy Eamon Ryan is wrong here. If the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment had not had his accident, I expect that the dialogue to which we committed following the Deputy's own attendance at the Cabinet sub-committee, which was a useful meeting, would be up and running by now. It is the Minister's intention fully to engage with the groups Deputy Eamon Ryan brought to that meeting to let them have their opportunity to contribute to this.
Perhaps the Deputy should meet the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment to have a full appraisal of the extent of what is going on in terms of the agenda and the complex discussions that are taking place about mitigation and reaching our targets, both here and at a Brussels level. I have a wealth of information here which I will not have time to outline for the Deputy now. Perhaps he should have a full appraisal with the Minister and afterwards, if the Deputy feels there are particular issues he wishes to pursue further, we would be happy to work with him.
Every day we have new evidence of climate change and the detrimental effect it has on our environment and the rejection of all of this evidence by the new US Administration will clearly make the situation worse. The programme for Government refers to climate change being the global challenge of our generation. I appreciate that the Minister had an accident and I wish him well, but this goes before his cycling incident. The fact is the Government has not fulfilled the programme for Government commitment to extensive public consultation to incorporate the land use, infrastructural and economic issues in a long-term transition to a new low-carbon future. Almost a year after the Government was elected, there is still no sign of this. Can the Taoiseach tell us when we will see measures put in place? Can we also get some sense of when the national low-carbon transition and mitigation plan will be published? It was to be published within six months of the new Government being formed. That has not happened. Then there is the big concern that we will not meet our 2020 emission targets or 2030 emission targets. Can the Taoiseach update the Dáil on what is happening to all of these really important and critical issues?
I thank Deputy Adams.
I will finish on this. The Government's plans for the implementation of pay-by-weight bin charges and the protections which will be in place for low-income households was a significantly controversial issue.
We are over time here now.
There has been a dramatic increase in the amount of waste being dumped on the sides of our roads. Can the Taoiseach give us a sense of what additional measures the Government envisages for dealing with this problem?
There is a review on the latter matter under way by the Minister at present and he will report to the House in due course.
The national dialogue on climate change will gather representatives of civil society to discuss and maximise consensus on climate actions. The Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government would hope that there will be a merger between the climate dialogue and the 2040 vision, which, I think, will be necessary. Obviously, it is envisaged that the dialogue will provide a mechanism to allow the mobilisation of strategic citizen and various group actions to address the climate challenges for Ireland. The briefing document, recently published, on the national mitigation programme and the statutory consultation to follow in mid-March are seen as a central part of the dialogue in terms of providing input on and, therefore, the prioritising and implementation of climate change policy.
The Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment is preparing proposals for the climate change national dialogue. These will come before the next Cabinet committee and will inform members.
The national mitigation plan will represent a whole-of-Government approach involving significant cross-departmental involvement that sets out exactly what Ireland is planning to do to further our transition to a low-carbon climate resilient and environmentally sustainable economy and development of Ireland's first statutory national mitigation plan represents a hugely important step in this transition.
In terms of infrastructure generally, it is clear that there is a broader issue here. The Government does not seem to have any imaginative or creative proposals to deal with the infrastructural bottlenecks and the necessary projects that will be required over the medium term. The previous capital plan was a five-year plan and in the first two years, very little happened because all of the funding was back-loaded to the last two. It got people through a general election. It seems to me that was its sole purpose.
There is an issue in terms of the volume of funding available to get necessary works done. For example, the children's hospital is now estimated to cost €1 billion. Will that impact on other health infrastructure across the country?
Will the Taoiseach clarify that? We were sold a pup years ago when Deputy Howlin said that the national lottery was being sold to fund the children's hospital.
It was to part-fund it.
That was probably one of the biggest fibs of all time, because that has come and gone.
That is unfair. I do not mind the Deputy using euphemism-----
The Deputy should relax.
-----but since I spent some time in the Chair reading precedents of the Dáil I know he is not allowed to say that.
It had nothing to do with the children's hospital but he needed a hook on which to hang the privatisation of the lottery. As a left-wing Deputy, he had to hang it on some type of hook.
It was not privatised.
That was €1 billion. The Deputy knows what I am saying - the management of it was.
It was a licence.
The other issue is that projects such as the Cork to Limerick motorway are on ice. It is major infrastructure. If we are to deal with the difference between Dublin and the west there must be infrastructure in the west.
The third point is that this time last year, the Taoiseach dug a sod in Cork, allegedly to confirm that the events centre was starting. It was a very cynical political act. It is 12 months later and nothing has happened, although the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, who is sitting beside the Taoiseach has announced-----
The Deputy's is out of time.
The Deputy does not know what he is talking about.
I do, because nothing happened.
The Deputy has never once come looking for detail on that project. He has done nothing to help it.
Can we please not have a constituency dispute?
Let them go, a Cheann Comhairle, it is great fun.
He has just announced to the newspaper that we need another €10 million.
I have not.
The Deputy has. It was in the Evening Echo last night.
Deputy Martin, it is great fun but would you resume your seat?
Deputy Coveney had it advertised on the back of every bus in Cork before the election, which is not-----
It is not the first time today that the Deputy has decided to get into constituency projects.
Deputy Martin, these are questions to the Taoiseach.
The Deputy has done nothing to help the project.
Deputy Coveney, restrain yourself.
Deputy Coveney is very sensitive about it obviously.
It is a county council meeting.
Can the Taoiseach respond, please?
Deputy Martin said that people were sold a pup here. Obviously, we were sold many pups over the years from the national spatial strategy onwards. The Government has a clear picture of what it wishes to do. The Ministers for Public Expenditure and Reform and Finance have set out the strategy for the mid-term capital review. The Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Coveney, has started the national consultation on the vision for the country for 2040. The Deputy raised the Limerick to Cork motorway. That is the reason, on the opening of the European Investment Bank office in Dublin, we wish to consider a series of infrastructure projects such as that motorway-----
Deputy Varadkar killed that project.
-----and projects in port development. Where a stream of income could potentially come from the metro or the Luas that will pay for those long-term, low interest loans from the European Investment Bank, that will provide another opportunity to deal with infrastructure that cannot be dealt with from the Exchequer reserves alone. That is going to facilitate particularly important elements of where we wish to be 20 years hence.
The national children's hospital will go ahead. The Minister for Health will bring a business case to the Cabinet shortly. This is about a project catering for 25% of the country's people, the children, for the next 50 years. We have been talking about it for 20 years. We had the same with the National Maternity Hospital. Both projects are very important for the health reform strategy and structure-----
That was not the question.
We will deal with it. In case anybody gets the idea that it will not happen, there will be a fixed contract price and there will be a monitoring committee to ensure it happens and that it will be operating by 2021.
Deputy Coveney is correct that there has been a great deal of fanciful talk today.
Absolutely. It is rewriting history.
The licence to operate the lottery had to be tendered under European competition law. It was a matter of European law, as was explained in some detail. To get €410 million for it was good. Of that, there was €200 million for the national children's hospital, which was supposed to cost €400 million at the time. The other €200 million was spent on roads and schools, by re-establishing the summer works programme, at a time when we did not have a bob because Deputy Martin and his team had banjaxed the country.
I have two questions for the Taoiseach. I listened to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform speaking on national radio this morning. He appeared to indicate that the overshoot in the cost of the national children's hospital is to come from paring across the Government. Is that a fact, or is there to be a significant expansion of the capital programme?
With regard to climate action, has the national mitigation plan been costed? How much will the cost be? Will an ambitious plan be rolled out to retrofit all public buildings, starting with schools, to ensure they have solar panels and are completely energy efficient?
The national children's hospital will go ahead.
Where will the Government get the money?
The Minister for Health will bring his business case to the Cabinet. It is not to be completed until 2021. The Deputy is correct. I distinctly remember him, when he was a Minister, bringing his memorandum to the Cabinet in accordance with proper procedures to deal with the lottery funding being made available to commence that project. Obviously, the capital expenditure review to be carried out in the middle of this year is part of being able to deal with essential projects such as this one. It may well be that in some departmental reflections some additional donations might be made for it-----
Do they know there are going to be additional donations?
We must remember that during the recession, caused by bad politics, many firms tendered on the limit or under price and many of them actually went out of business. This will be the biggest infrastructure project in the country for many years to come and it is not within the range of most construction firms. There will be a fixed price for this and it will be adhered to. I hear quotations just short of €1 billion, having risen from €450 million to €650 million and to €800 million and €900 million. Let us see what the business case states. However, this is one issue that will be dealt with and will proceed.
Departmental Records
Brendan Howlin
Question:9. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach the number of files withheld by his department in respect of the files transferred to the National Archives in respect of the year 1986; and the number withheld under sections 8(4)(a), (b) and (c), respectively, of the National Archives Act 1986. [4270/17]
A total of 1,578 files or file parts in respect of the year 1986 were transferred by my Department to the National Archives. They were then released for public inspection on 1 January 2017. Eight files were withheld in full.
The grounds for withholding records under section 8(4) of the National Archives Act 1986 are that it would be contrary to the public interest; or would or might constitute a breach of statutory duty or a breach of good faith on the grounds that they contain information supplied in confidence; or that it would or might cause distress or danger to living persons on the ground that they contain information about individuals or would or might be likely to lead to an action for damages for defamation.
Of the eight files withheld by my Department, three files were withheld under section 8(4)(a), one file was withheld under section 8(4)(b) and four were withheld under section 8(4)(b) and (c) of the Act.
The evaluation of files for release to the National Archives is carried out by designated officials in my Department. I have no role in that process.
It is always intriguing when files are withheld because all of these files are of national interest. With regard to the eight files withheld, can the Taoiseach give an indication, even in broad strokes, of what subject matters they covered? Is the determination made by one official or is there an oversight or appeals system? The default position should be that they be released unless there is a very compelling case otherwise. Third, will the files ever be published? Once a single civil servant makes the determination, is that it for all time? Are they never to be accessible to posterity?
The evaluation of the files is carried out by designated officials. In determining the release of files a balance must be struck between providing the most complete documentation possible and the section of the Act I mentioned. With regard to Northern Ireland files, it is normal that certain records containing sensitive security or personal information will be retained under section 8(4). After consultation with the National Archives a number of 70 year old files that were previously withheld under section 8(4) were released or are now eligible for release.
The Deputy asked if there is an appeals system.
Is it just one civil servant making the determination?
I will have to get details on that for the Deputy.
Do they ever become public?
Not all the files are in compliance with the records management of the Department and the Acts.
I will find out if there is an appeals system or if it is irrevocable. I do not assume it is irrevocable. If some of the files that are 70 years old that were originally refused under section 8(5)(a), which is about matters contrary to the public interest, there may be no danger to the public interest releasing those very old files now.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Taoiseach as ucht an freagra a thabhairt. My question is on Government files. I recently wrote to the Taoiseach following revelations that the British army and RUC special branch used waterboarding in the North during the 1970s. This was uncovered when the Pat Finucane Centre revealed that Government papers from London had revealed the use of waterboarding as a torture technique and that it continued after the British Government claimed it had ended. British Government files revealed that the then Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, raised a specific case with the British Prime Minister of the day, Ted Heath.
I have asked the Taoiseach to release the Government's minutes. We have only the British Government's version of the meeting. It is obviously in the public interest. Although it happened so long ago, it is an issue of current importance. I also urge the Taoiseach to ensure the Government undertakes a review of files in other Departments dealing with the North to identify any other information which may be available to the Government about the use of torture. Given that the Taoiseach of the day felt strong enough to raise the issue, one wonders what happened afterwards and whether it was pursued. How did the Government of the day and subsequent Governments deal with this important issue?
It is very good that the State releases archives. It is probably the one centre in a democracy that has the capacity to release comprehensive archives. Not all actors in dramatic situations are in a position to release their archives or are disposed to do so. It is positive. Normally, the release of archives is a smooth operation. During recent years, for some reason, a new practice has emerged whereby it is preceded by an announcement by the Minister that the papers are on their way. It is like a Minister announcing that he or she is confident the sun will shine in the morning. It is a curious practice. It is the only political involvement.
The Taoiseach used the phrase "contrary to the public interest". At times, this can be a very subjective assessment. Deputy Brendan Howlin's question is reasonable. Surely, there must be a second opinion, maybe some time later, as to whether it is contrary to the public interest that files that are 70 years old are still not being released. Down through the years, there was a conservative approach in the public service generally to the release of files. To ease the concerns of historians and others who might feel they are missing out on some gems or particularly interesting nuggets of detail and information, a system of second opinion or further examination would be useful in determining whether something is contrary to the public interest or would lead to litigation in the event of archives being published.
I too raise the interests of future historians and economists. The Central Bank wrote to the Houses asking that we destroy or return all records relating to the banking inquiry. At the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, I expressed the importance that the material be kept somewhere, whether in the Central Bank or the National Archives, to guarantee that in the future when people are looking back, they have access to all the material. Will the Taoiseach, through his Department, check with the Central Bank that it is happening? While I have no problem with the Houses destroying all the records, it is very important that there be a record somewhere, probably in the Central Bank or the Department of Finance, of such material. I am concerned that if we are destroying it, the material should exist somewhere else in archive.
I will have it checked. We discussed this before regarding the information on the residential institutions redress scheme. Although there were calls for all of it to be destroyed, it was agreed that it should be protected. I accept that there should be a system for second opinions or appeals. It cannot depend on the decision of one person. I am sure it is the case, and I will confirm this to the Deputies. I do not know whether Deputy Martin's remarks about making announcements on what is coming or whether the sun is to shine are confined to one Minister or several Ministers.
Apologies.
Deputy Gerry Adams wrote to me and I received and read his letter. I have asked that the files in question, in so far as they are available, be examined. I will respond to his question. I am not sure if there is a connection to other Departments. In so far as we can trace these matters, we will do so. I commend the Pat Finucane Centre on its investigative analysis and for coming across the fact that waterboarding was used as a method of torture in the 1970s.
During the previous Government, Ireland formally joined the Open Government Partnership and one of the first commitments we made was to open data. I take it that the Administration is following up on the Open Government Partnership initiative and is pursuing the issue of open data. For future archives, it is much more complicated to capture discussions between civil servants that are generated around meetings and interactions between Departments when they are in electronic form. I trust there is a very robust, world standard mechanism for capturing proper Government papers for the future that are now generated in electronic form.
I am sure it is the case. Does the Deputy mean at Cabinet meetings?
I mean all public data, including Cabinet meetings. Up to now, things were written or typed. Now, much of it is e-mailed or done electronically. I presume it will be done-----
When the Freedom of Information Act was introduced by the then Minister, Ruairí Quinn, there were suggestions made at the end of papers by certain civil servants that things were going to change in respect of what they would write or notes they would take at meetings. I will have the matter checked to see what the scale, standard and integrity of the recording of official papers is.