On the motion for the Adjournment Deputy Harte gave notice that he was raising the matter of Question No. 73 on the Order Paper for Thursday, 16th February, 1967.
Adjournment Debate. - Drainage of County Donegal River.
On Thursday, 16th February, I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance the following question:
... when it is proposed to commence drainage of the Cloon Burn, Carrigans, County Donegal.
To this the Parliamentary Secretary gave the following reply:
I cannot yet say when work on this scheme will commence.
That seems to be a simple answer to a straightforward question, but the story does not end there. I should like to give the House the background to this. The Cloon Burn is a small river in east Donegal, serving a very fertile valley. A small committee was formed to agitate for the cleaning of this river and for the past 20 years its spokesmen were made promises by people in high places that this river would be cleaned. The promises were always made coming up to an election, particularly a general election. The river was not in the electoral area of certain individuals and therefore did not arise at county council elections.
My own experience in relation to this problem goes back to July, 1960, when I was approached by two individuals to see if the negotiations could be re-opened in order to help the local farmers. I was not a Member of this House, but I was a member of the local authority. I made inquiries from the OPW. I was told this river was on the priority list, but that it would be many years before any drainage would take place. This information was conveyed to a meeting to which I and many other public representatives were invited. Again, many promises were made. I took the matter up with the local authority and, because of the delay, as indicated by the Office of Public Works, the engineering section agreed, provided the money was made available, to do a temporary job on the river. This had a certain amount of success, but then political manoeuvring began and the promises were repeated. I am not terribly interested in who takes credit for the cleaning of the Cloon Burn as long as it is cleaned. Some Deputies may wonder why I raise this question tonight. I do so for two reasons. First, because the House votes money for this type of work and, secondly, because there is certain confusion locally as to what the actual position is at the moment.
There is not one bit.
Deputy Cunningham is coming in here to interrupt the proceedings. He was very mute when we last met the local authority. He was prepared to manoeuvre like the cutest salmon that ever went up the Foyle and have it shelved until such time as he might get the credit for it. But there are smarter men in the Fianna Fáil organisation than Deputy Cunningham and Deputy Cunningham was outwitted. He should not blame me for that.
As I said, the House votes money for this kind of work. Therefore, when a Deputy addresses a question to the person responsible for this type of work, I believe the House expects an honest reply. Parliament ceases to be Parliament when a Deputy who asks a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary a straightforward question gets a dishonest reply. As you will see later, something like this has happened. I raise this matter because it is not the money of the Fianna Fáil Party which is going to the cleaning of the river. This is money provided by the taxpayers and ratepayers of this country. The people who have been paying through the nose for having land like this drained are entitled to be told the truth when a question is asked in Parliament.
The second reason I raise the matter is that there is confusion locally. When I received the Official Report containing the Parliamentary Secretary's reply, I arranged to have it sent to the local newspapers in order to inform the people concerned what the actual position was. The confusion arises now because last weekend there was in one paper the Parliamentary Secretary's reply to me that he could not say when work on the scheme would commence, but under banner headlines in another paper the Parliamentary Secretary is reported as having told the secretary of the local Fianna Fáil cumann that work would commence in another fortnight. It is a sad state of affairs when a responsible Deputy who asks a simple, straightforward question——
That was two weeks ago.
——and gets what appears to be a straightforward answer should go home to be told that the local Fianna Fáil secretary has been given a different answer. I believe the integrity of the Parliamentary Secretary is at stake; my honesty is at stake and the records of the House are inaccurate. If for any reason I have made a mistake, then I apologise to the Parliamentary Secretary. But I want to know who has been told the truth—the local Fianna Fáil secretary or this House? I knew the Parliamentary Secretary when he was just an ordinary Deputy. I met him during elections; he standing on a box spouting for Fianna Fáil and I for Fine Gael. We could always see certain reason in each other's arguments and were always prepared to co-operate when it came to decide who should speak first. I do not mind the Parliamentary Secretary trying to score a political point but I submit that there are more honest ways of doing it. Telling a lie in this House is not, in my opinion, the proper way to score a political point. I know that Deputy Cunningham feels that a certain amount of wind has been taken out of his sails because, like many other Fianna Fáil Deputies, he is not without sin whenever it comes to making promises about the Cloon Burn. Promises were made by Deputy Cunningham and by other Fianna Fáil Deputies.
And now they are being kept and you are annoyed.
I remember that the Deputy addressed the meeting at Monreagh national school and denied that it would take seven or eight years and said that the project would commence in about two years and that is now almost seven years ago.
The Deputy is now telling the lies he is accusing others of telling.
The Deputy should not be accused of telling lies. I am sure Deputy Cunningham will withdraw that remark.
The Deputy previously said that the Parliamentary Secretary had issued lies——
No, he asked who issued the lie.
If the Deputy wishes to withdraw——
I withdraw the statement.
He withdraws and apologises.
At the meeting at Monreagh national school, promises were made about the Cloon Burn by Deputy Cunningham but Deputy Cunningham is not as shrewd or astute a politician as certain other members of the Fianna Fáil Party, and when it comes to taking credit for all the spadework that goes into certain things Deputy Cunningham has done, another person more powerful in the Fianna Fáil organisation can, for some reason or other, get in at the last minute and take full credit for himself. This in no exception because prior to the last general election on a famous occasion on a Sunday evening a Minister of the Government who is now responsible for Agriculture and Fisheries——
And who shall be nameless!
One of the faceless ones.
When it comes to the NFA, I would not say he is nameless or blameless but it would be unparliamentary to use those names. The Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries addressed a meeting in the locality and promised that work would commence. It was significant that this was about a fortnight before a general election. Nothing happened until some time after last Christmas when I was again approached by local people to find out what was happening. In conversation with different people with whom I came in contact, I explained the promises made by Deputy Cunningham and Deputy Blaney and the promises made by Deputy J. Brennan, when he was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance, and said that I was but a humble Deputy representing the smaller Party in North-East Donegal but that, as a Deputy, I would ask the Parliamentary Secretary what the position was. I said I would use all the resources I could muster to try to help in this regard, provided certain individuals who did not share my political views would contact their local public representatives and impress on them the importance of having this river drained.
The net result was that the Parliamentary Secretary, having answered my question, discovered that a political point could be scored. I accuse is of it, but I suspect that there is another person who is the architect of the manoeuver——
Ah!
——and who my have taken it upon himself to try to score that political point. If that is the position, I accuse the Parliamentary Secretary of not knowing what is happening in his Department, of coming into the House and chancing his arm as did a certain other Minister of Fianna Fáil when asked a question by Deputy Dillon a few months ago. He also chanced his arm. I believe the Parliamentary Secretary could have chanced his arm, that he was not attending to his own business when he answered my Parliamentary question.
I have raised this matter because, first, I sent a copy of the Dáil debates for that particular day to the people concerned. It found its way into the local newspapers and the Parliamentary Secretary has been quoted in the local newspaper as having told me one story—incidentally, it does not share the political views of the Parliamentary Secretary's Party—and as having told the secretary of the local Fianna Fáil cumann at St. Johnston that work would commence within the next fortnight. I now want the Parliamentary Secretary to tell the House to whom he has told the truth. Has he told the truth to the House or has he told the Fianna Fáil cumann secretary the truth? I want to know; the House should know and the people most concerned most of all should be told the truth.
The Parliamentary Secretary, to reply.
There are two minutes left.
It is scarcely worthwhile.
But I should like to get on the records of the House because I think this is a matter which should not only be raised in the House but should also be raised before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Here we had a very simple question asked in the House by Deputy Harte: is the Parliamentary Secretary going to spend public money on this project in East Donegal? His reply was: "I do not know when I am going to spend it." This is a very categoric, positive reply. The project is a fairly substantial one. Machinery is necessary and must be moved in. Such decisions are not taken overnight but within 24 hours of having given that reply, the secretary of the local cumann, who shares the same political views as the Parliamentary Secretary, is in a position to announce that work will commence within a fortnight.
Ten days after.
The Deputy knows all about it?
It could not possibly be true. You do not just take snap decisions like that regarding moving in machines. I think it is a disgraceful procedure, bringing this House into disrepute and bringing the Parliamentary Secretary down to the lowest level of political scandal, in my opinion.
I must congratulate Deputy O'Donnell on his very creditable display——
We do not want you to praise Deputy O'Donnell. We have raised the matter on the Adjournment and we want to know if you have told me or the secretary of the Fianna Fáil cumann the truth?
Order.
You may have noticed, a Cheann Comhairle, that I did not interrupt either Deputy O'Donnell or Deputy Harte and I would ask your protection while I try to reply to them. Deputy O'Donnell evidently does not know a damn thing about this affair of Deputy Harte's. The most serious thing Deputy Harte said was that the Parliamentary Secretary had told a cumann secretary, presumably a Fianna Fáil cumann secretary, that it was the intention of the Board of Works to carry out the scheme within a couple of weeks, having previously, or possibly simultaneously, told Deputy Harte in the House that I was not then able to say when this scheme was going to be carried out.
Straight off, this simply is not so. I was not in touch with any cumann secretary or any private individual, so far as I know, in County Donegal about this matter but I think the reason for Deputy Harte's discomfiture, his embarrassment about this is simply that the question he tabled about this matter came up in the Dáil when he was not here.
That is untrue. I was present.
It is not untrue.
It is untrue.
Order. I will insist that the Parliamentary Secretary be allowed to make his case without interruption.
I claim I was present——
I will insist on the Parliamentary Secretary's being allowed to make his case without interruption.
This debate obviously has been staged by Deputy Harte for publication in the local papers to save his very evident embarrassment over the situation that developed as a result of his not being present here when his question came up in the House.
That is untrue, and the Parliamentary Secretary should not say it.
If Deputy Harte cannot contain himself, he must leave the House. I will not allow interruptions.
I think that what Deputy Harte would really like to happen would be, like his colleague the Chief Whip of the Fine Gael Party, Deputy L'Estrange, to be removed from the House in order to prevent me from telling the facts.
To whom did the Parliamentary Secretary tell the truth?
The Parliamentary Secretary should stop provoking Deputy Harte.
It is none of Deputy Ryan's business to interrupt me when I am speaking.
The Parliamentary Secretary will please address his remarks to the Chair.
Deputy Ryan is addressing me, too.
Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle would convey to the Parliamentary Secretary the rules of procedure?
It is very difficult to proceed in view of the constant bombardment of interruptions.
All we want to know is to whom did the Parliamentary Secretary tell the truth.
Deputy Harte will either have to leave the House or stop interrupting. That is my last word to Deputy Harte.
Deputy O'Donnell is wasting his time.
The fact is that Deputy Harte finds it difficult to listen to the truth. I have a general instruction in my Office to the effect that I require brevity and accuracy in a Parliamentary reply. The question Deputy Harte tabled on this matter was answered accurately and briefly. We all know, as colleagues of Deputy Harte, that he is a pretty vigorous person when he does attend the House to ask supplementary questions. The position that obtained when Deputy Harte asked his question was precisely as I said in my reply to his question. The position then was that it was not possible, at that time, to say precisely when drainage operations would start on the Cloon Burn. That is accurate. If Deputy Harte had been in the House, he would obviously have asked, by way of supplementary question, if I could give any indication as to when work would start. But, since Deputy Harte was not in the House——
What has that to do with your telling me one thing and your telling a Fianna Fáil cumann secretary another thing? The Parliamentary Secretary is manoeuvring——
Deputy Harte will leave the House or cease interrupting.
No supplementary question was asked simply for the reason that Deputy Harte denies, that is, that he was not present in the House at all to ask it. The arrangements for the drainage of the Cloon Burn had reached an advanced stage and we were almost ready to roll but we could not at that time say precisely when. One thing very often arises in this House when a phrase like "in a short time" is used. Some facetious person in the Opposition will stand up and ask what precisely "in a short time" means. If Deputy Harte had been in the House at the time I replied to the question he had tabled, I could have told him that it would be in a few weeks: that is the position. But Deputy Harte's disappointment and anguish at the prospect of——
I could not listen to that harangue. With the permission of the Chair, I shall leave the House in protest against the refusal of the Parliamentary Secretary to answer my questions. To whom has he told the truth?
Deputy Harte withdrew from the Chamber.
Take it up with the Committee on Procedure and Privileges —a misleading Parliamentary reply.
I can well understand the discomfiture of Deputy Harte and his colleagues in Fine Gael. Deputy O'Donnell was going to bring it to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. It was going to be a big deal. Like many another Fine Gael proposition, it was based upon falsehood.
The Parliamentary Secretary's falsehood.
I stand on complete accuracy. I challenge any member of the Fine Gael Party to show that the reply I gave to Deputy Harte's question when he tabled it is not accurate.
Deliberately misleading.
It is perfectly accurate.
When did the Parliamentary Secretary tell the Fianna Fáil secretary that the work would begin?
The rest of the Fine Gael allegation is to the effect that I informed some Fianna Fáil secretary in Donegal——
Did you or did you not?
I did not. I told you at the outset I was in communication with no private person in County Donegal, as far as I know.
If the Parliamentary Secretary gave the information to a Deputy, why did he not give the information to Deputy Harte as well?
There are other Deputies from Donegal in this House who are much more zealous than Deputy Harte. In the couple of weeks that ensued from the time Deputy Harte tabled his casual question, and was not here to ask a supplementary question that might have been based upon it and that would certainly have elicited more information, the position in regard to the Cloon Burn had clarified itself and, to his dismay, I am now able to say that the drainage of the Cloon Burn will go ahead. Deputy Harte, plainly, is very embarrassed about this. He started the tirade here to-night on the promises made over the years, presumably by my colleagues in Fianna Fáil, about the drainage of the Cloon Burn. It will be drained and drained immediately, and that is the reason for Deputy Harte's embarrassment.
Deputy Harte was much more loquacious in this House than was the Parliamentary Secretary until he came to the Front Bench.
I sympathise with Deputy Harte's embarrassment. It is clear that he based all his hopes on the fact that the drainage of the Cloon Burn would further be delayed. It has been decided that the drainage of the Cloon Burn will go ahead, whatever Deputy Harte thinks.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House when he will drain the Shannon rather than give that information——
Tell Deputy Harte to get his facts right.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.55 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 1st March, 1967.