In my capacity as Fianna Fáil convenor I faxed a letter to the chairman last Friday seeking a special meeting to investigate matters relating to the Special Criminal Court which were not dealt with by the inquiry in the Department of Justice. I referred specifically to a matter disclosed in the Dáil last Thursday. I await the Chairman's response. I wish to raise the matter prior to discussing the Bill before the committee because we will not have another opportunity this week. There are a considerable number of other matters to which I could refer——
Business of Select Committee.
The Deputy may not refer to any other matters. Today's business is the Criminal Law Bill, 1996. A fax was received in my office from the Deputy between 5.30 p.m. and 6 p.m. last Friday. I do not anticipate that the Deputy imagined the committee would meet on Sunday or Monday. The matter is being dealt with by my office and the Deputy will receive a reply in due course.
As I may be absent for a short period this afternoon I propose that Deputy Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) take the Chair at that time. Is that agreed? Agreed.
How soon does the Chairman intend to decide on Deputy Fitzgerald's legitimate request? We have made our position——
The Deputy should not misrepresent what I said. There is no difficulty in my making up my mind. I have my mind made up but I have not communicated the reply to Deputy Fitzgerald. If he wishes me to do so orally I will inform him that we are now dealing with the Criminal Law Bill, 1996, and we have no function now or at any future time dealing with any report with reference to the Special Criminal Court. The matter was dealt with extensively and conclusively by the Dáil and this committee has no function in the matter unless and until the matter is referred to us by the Dáil.
Do the committee's terms of reference prevent us from initiating such matters? Before sending my letter I did some research and the letter was sent in all seriousness.
All letters the Deputy sends are treated seriously.
The Dáil has not dealt with an issue that emerged on last Thursday but was not covered in the inquiry in the Department of Justice. That issue is outstanding.
To my recollection there is an unambiguous commitment in the programme for Government to establish a special committee to deal with such inquiries. It was agreed in the past that this committee would be the most suitable vehicle for investigations. If not, what is the appropriate vehicle?
The Deputy's attempt to have the committee discuss the matter to which he refers is made on the basis that he feels the committee is a lawful substitute for the Dáil. He says there are matters which were not discussed adequately in the Dáil which he feels should be discussed here. That would only take place if the Dáil were to refer the matter to the committee. The committee is not a substitute for the Dáil.
If the Deputy was present when the matter referred to was discussed in the Dáil, he would be aware that it dealt with the matter extensively and conclusively. The committee has no function in discussing the matter until such time as the matter is referred to it by the Dáil. The Deputy should refrain from engaging in such mischief. He has taken little part or interest in the debate on this matter over the last three weeks. He was not available to attend at the committee on a number of occasions on which we sought a quorum in recent times. When he says the letter was written in all seriousness——
That is outrageous. The records of the committee will clearly show my attendance. I have had an assault of unwarranted and unjustified proportions from you, Chairman. It disappoints me extremely that I was telephoned at my office on many occasions and asked to run over here and form a quorum. I did so, but I was always in the process of coming over anyway. I reject out of hand your insinuation that my record of attendance is anything but very satisfactory and I challenge you to produce the record of attendance of Members of this committee.
I ask Deputy Fitzgerald to withdraw that because he is totally out of order.
You are totally out of order, Chairman, in relation to my attendance at this committee and I challenge you to produce evidence of the attendance or withdraw unambiguously that with which you have charged me.
My point referred to the attendance by Deputy Fitzgerald who is now trying to involve this committee in some way in the Cromien report. Where was Deputy Fitzgerald when the matter was being discussed in the Dáil? I stand over what I said, that he was not one of the persons to the fore in conducting that debate, either by way of question or substantive speech. I think the record will bear me out.
I have no difficulty with that aspect of your contribution, Chairman. Are you saying that I, as Fianna Fáil convenor, have no democratic right to request formally that this committee deal with matters outstanding which have not been dealt with definitively by the Dáil?
If there are matters which you or any Deputy feels were not adequately addressed in the course of the debate in plenary session of the Dáil, it can be raised this evening on the Order of Business, on the Adjournment or by way of question either to the Taoiseach or the Minister for Justice. We have specially convened this meeting to discuss Committee Stage of the Criminal Law Bill, 1996. The agenda was circulated some time ago. At no stage did I receive a request from a Member that we leave aside the Criminal Law Bill and discuss any other business and I am not allowing any further discussion on any other matter. We will proceed with the Bill before us, the first amendment to which is in the name of Deputy O'Donoghue.
I have always regarded you as a very fair-minded Chairman and I know you will renew your old habits in that regard shortly. I consider it unfortunate that you should have launched such a personal attack on Deputy Fitzgerald who, as you know quite well, would possibly have found it extremely difficult to get an opportunity to speak in the Dáil debate. That much having been said, I will not get carried down that side road by you as it is a diversionary tactic which has nothing to do with Deputy Fitzgerald's legitimate request.
This committee is quite entitled to express the view that it wishes to examine the events surrounding the improper composition of the Special Criminal Court during August, September, October and part of November 1996. There is a commitment in A Government of Renewal that the Government will ensure that all appointees to high office in the State, for example, the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Governor of the Central Bank, will attend the relevant Dáil committees as appropriate, subject to the legal constraints of their office. They are not my words; they are the words of the Government. It appears that this committee can make known its view that it wishes to examine the Attorney General, the Director of Public Prosecutions and other figures in relation to this matter so we can get to the truth. Deputy Fitzgerald and I are seeking to establish the truth because we have failed abysmally in the Dáil to do so. The only way we will ever get to the bottom of this business is by this committee carrying out its role. It can only do so if we are in a position to interview the people who are involved in this business and to examine the documentation.
There is ample precedent for this in the House. For example, in July 1982 there was an order of the House that there be an investigation into the matter of the connection of SL1 telephone consoles with override capacity to the PABX serving the Houses of the Oireachtas.
I must remind the Deputy ——
This committee has a right irrespective of what you say, Chairman, and however you wish to try to obfuscate the matter. However much you wish to try to throw a smokescreen over it, this committee has a legitimate right to state its intention and preference for an inquiry.
This matter has been concluded by way of Dáil debate and any further debate on the matter shall take place in the plenary session of the House.
I reject any allegation you have made against me which is falsely founded in relation to my attendance at this committee.
I am very disappointed at these latest exchanges emanating from the Fianna Fáil camp. It seems this is a further attempt to squeeze political mileage out of the administrative foul up in the Department of Justice which has been discussed ad nauseam in plenary session in the Dáil in a motion of confidence and in further plenary session last week. Despite the fact that Fianna Fáil failed to make any progress at either of those plenary sessions, there is now a further attempt to raise the issue here.
Deputy O'Donoghue mentioned the fact that there have been previous inquiries but they have been by order of the Dáil.
I know that.
There is no order of the Dáil in this case. An attempt to set up a special inquiry was rejected by the Dáil. Adequate time has been devoted to this issue already, but if the Opposition wants to raise the matter further in the Dáil, it is quite entitled to do so.
This committee has no role or function whatever in the matter. It is meeting here for a special purpose, to consider the Criminal Law Bill, 1996, and I suggest that we get on with the job. Let us have no more time wasting.
I request that you withdraw the allegations you made earlier against Deputy Fitzgerald. At the last committee meeting which I attended and which Deputy O'Donoghue was unable to attend, you made an unwarranted attack on him also. Later in the meeting, you graciously apologised for what you had said. Now you are attacking another member of Fianna Fáil and I suggest you are not acting impartially. If you examine the record of this committee since its foundation, you will find that the record of Fianna Fáil is second to none. We are the best attendees at this committee and that has been the case from the outset. You should withdraw the allegations you made against Deputy Fitzgerald in relation to his attendance at this committee.
I made no allegations about Deputy Fitzgerald's attendance.
It is on the record.
I said that for the past three weeks we have been unable for a number of reasons to proceed with our business. I did not single out Deputy Fitzgerald as being the only one responsible.
You did.
If I did, I have no difficulty in setting the record straight. What I said earlier and repeated is that Fianna Fáil is engaging in mischief because of the debate over the past two weeks. This committee has absolutely no function, particularly today, in discussing anything other than the Criminal Law Bill, 1996. If Deputy O'Donoghue is not prepared to move amendment No. 1, I will abandon the meeting.
I am quite prepared to move amendment No. 1, but if we cannot legitimately discuss this issue at this committee, then where can we discuss it? I suggest that you accede to Deputy Fitzgerald's request or, alternatively, in the interest of democracy, ensure there is a special meeting of this committee to discuss whether or not it will indicate to the Houses of the Oireachtas that it wants an inquiry. At the very least, democracy and fair play demand that much from you.
Deputy O'Donoghue, there are avenues available to you by way of the Order of Business or the plenary session of the House. I have nothing before me to deal with this matter. There has been no reference from the Dáil.
You have a letter from Deputy Fitzgerald.
I received a letter from a Deputy but I cannot accede to that request because the committee has neither role nor function in dealing with this issue. Therefore, we will not deal with it.
I will not be driven down side roads on this issue. Will the Chairman consider our request that, at the very least, there will be a special meeting of the committee to discuss whether we desire to indicate our wish to the Houses of the Oireachtas that the committee investigate the Judge Dominic Lynch affair? As Opposition parties, we are entitled to do so and this is the place to raise the matter. We do not see how any other committee could examine it, given the nature of their terms of reference.
This matter was voted on in the Dáil last week. In its wisdom, the Dáil rejected the amendment tabled by Deputy O'Donoghue that this committee, or one of its counterparts, might have a role or function in the matter. It is not open to the committee to embark on something that was specifically rejected by way of a motion in the Dáil. It would extend beyond the limits of the committee's duty to do so. We are bound by the Dáil's decision that the matter should not be referred to the committee. Should any future plenary session of the Dáil decide to refer this, or any other matter to the committee, we will deal with it. However, the Dáil voted that the committee should not investigate the matter.
The chairman is being completely unreasonable in refusing our request for a meeting of the committee to discuss whether the matter should be investigated further. Rather than waste time, and to deal with the business at hand, I will let the matter lie. However, I assure the chairman that that is not the end of the matter.
Since the chairman has not seen fit to apologise for what the Official Report will show as an allegation against me regarding my attendance at this committee, I will withdraw from these proceedings. I am withdrawing from the meeting unless I receive an unequivocal apology.
I apologised on two occasions to the Deputy and Deputy Kenneally.
I have no intention of offering my co-operation as Fianna Fáil Whip to this committee until I receive that apology. I stand accused in relation to my attendance in the Dáil Chamber for the debate. I will not stand accused by the chairman or any other Member for my record of attendance at the committee.
Are we ready to proceed?
The chairman's reference to the decision of the Dáil is correct. However, this committee has conducted its own business in the past and Ministers have appeared before us from time to time. On one occasion, a former Minister for Justice appeared before the committee. Is there any impediment to the committee deciding to proceed with a particular item on the agenda?
Yes.
I am not sure that Standing Orders prohibit the committee from inviting the Minister to appear before it and deciding on a certain course of action with regard to this matter.
It is regrettable that Deputy Wallace did not discuss this matter with Deputies O'Donoghue or Fitzgerald before the meeting. There is a problem because Deputy Wallace wants the Minister to appear before us, Deputy Fitzgerald wants the committee to consider the entire report and Deputy O'Donoghue seems to suggest that the Attorney General should appear before us. I am bound by the rules governing procedure and practice in Dáil Éireann. I must interpret those rules in respect of this committee and its relationship with the report. If and when the Dáil directs or requests the committee to conduct an investigation, it will do so. Other than that, we have no role or function in the matter.
I was going to let the matter lie but I will not tolerate distortion. The chairman is aware we are seeking an inquiry into the entire matter. We are not concerned with questioning certain individuals; we want to investigate the improper composition of the Special Criminal Court. I do not wish to become embroiled in further arguments with the chairman and I will raise the matter in another forum. However, I am disappointed at his attitude to a legitimate request for a meeting to discuss whether the committee wished to indicate that it wanted to examine the entire matter. Deputy Fitzgerald's request went further, but the chairman would not accede to it. Therefore, we sought the minimum we believe the chairman would allow, but he has also refused to accede in this regard. We will pursue the matter elsewhere but I ask that the chairman not distort the request because that would not do himself or us any great service.
I look forward to Deputy O'Donoghue raising the matter elsewhere. If another forum should decide that the committee has a function in the matter, we will consider it in the fullness of time.
Deputy Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) took the Chair.
Criminal Law Bill, 1996: Committee Stage.
Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.