The question I tabled on today's Order Paper asked the Minister for Local Government if he has yet made a decision in relation to objections to a prohibition order made by Louth County Council; if he is aware that there is pollution of the beach and, if no decision has been made at the time of asking the question, when it can be expected. The Minister in reply said that he made an order last week. He ruled on the Louth County Council decision last week. When he was asked in a courteous way how he had ruled, whether for or against the council, he refused to give the information; he said he had not been asked for it.
I contend that Parliament is superior to Government. Parliament derives its power from the ballot box and the electorate and it behoves every one of us here to behave towards one another in a courteous manner. Naturally enough, we have our differences, but these should never be personal, and both Ministers and Deputies should, at all times, be courteous and helpful one to the other. I was left in the position that I could not in the course of my work, the work my constituents sent me here to do, inquire on their behalf because I did not know how the Minister had ruled. I was left in the position in which I could ask no supplementary questions, had you, Sir, permitted me to do so. I had to go to the telephone subsequently and ask the secretary of Louth County Council if he had received the information. The position is that the Minister had, indeed, ruled, as he said himself, last week. I accept his honesty in this regard completely.
Treating Deputies with courtesy and supplying information, when asked, is fundamental to our democracy. No Minister, no official, nobody at all, should be allowed to interfere with that. All of us who have been here for some time may on occasion sail pretty close to the wind, but most of us know how to keep within the limits of debate in order to avoid being ruled out of order. For a Minister to refuse to give the information I sought to get today is, in my opinion, the essence of discourtesy. It is indicative of the attitude this Minister adopts.
The subject matter of the question is of no consequence. If Louth County Council so wish, they can deal with this matter under other legislation. That is their right and, under that other legislation, they can, in my view, do what they want to do without referring to the Minister at all. If they were wrong in adopting a certain method which gave the Minister the right to annul the order made, they had the right to do wrong, if it was wrong, and the Minister had the right to annul. I fully support the Minister's right in that. All I wish to do is to point to the discourtesy of the Minister and underline the fact that a Member, elected here by universal suffrage, is put in a position in which, because of the discourtesy of the Minister, he cannot further inquire on behalf of his constituents.
