asked the Taoiseach whether any Minister or Parliamentary Secretary was, on his appointment as such, connected with any public or private company or business interest, and, if so, if he will state the name, style or description of the company or interest involved and the capacity in which such Minister or Parliamentary Secretary was connected with it, and, whether he is still so connected.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Ministers' and Parliamentary Secretaries' Business Interests.
Iarraim cead don Rúnaí Parlaiminte na freagraí a léamh thar mo cheann.
On the general principle underlying the subject of this question and its application, I would refer the Deputy to the replies given to similar questions in this House by me on the 11th December, 1947, and the 19th July, 1951, and by the then Taoiseach on the 9th March, 1948.
The general principle, the observance of which is what concerns the Dáil and the public in this matter, is that no Minister or Parliamentary Secretary should engage in any activities whatsoever that could reasonably be regarded as interfering, or being incompatible, with the full and proper discharge by him of the duties of his office—for example, acting in a position such as a company directorship carrying remuneration. I might mention, for the information of the Dáil, that the new Government, at one of their first meetings—on the 28th ultimo—formally decided that the principle would apply to their members and to the Parliamentary Secretaries.
As happened on the occasion of the change of administration that took place in June 1951, most of the Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries who, immediately before their recent entry upon office, held positions that would conflict with the principle I have just mentioned have already complied with the principle, by resignation or by being given leave of absence without remuneration. In the remaining few cases in which full compliance was not immediately practicable, steps are being taken to comply with the principle as soon as possible.
That is not an answer to my question. I asked a simple question. That is a long rigmarole of vague principles and platitudes in which I am not interested. I am interested in the question I put down here, asking—I do not know if there is any need to restate it—the name, style or description of the company or interest involved and the capacity in which such Minister or Parliamentary Secretary was connected with it. All that other stuff is awfully irrelevant.
It is not irrelevant. It is a matter that concerns this House. The private affairs of Ministers before they became Ministers are not a matter for the House.
That is not an answer to my question.
It is the only answer the Deputy is entitled to get.
That is a matter for the House. I have asked a question which is extremely important in regard to the whole question of the future policy of the Government. It is of the greatest importance for people to know the connections Ministers had prior to their taking up office.
These are private affairs of Ministers—what they have been doing before they became Ministers. It is what they do as Ministers that matters.
I remember in respect of myself the question being asked about my position by the Fianna Fáil Party, and the answer being given prior to my taking office as Minister for Health. I do not see why these facts cannot be presented. It is an evasion of a simple question and it is a misuse of the time of the House to have given that answer.