asked the Minister for Finance if he proposes to make any changes regarding the borrowing and holding of funds abroad; and, if so, what changes.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Foreign Borrowing.
29.
The answer is in the negative.
Could the Minister elaborate on that reply? I am asking the Minister why there are no changes?
I think that question should be framed the other way. Why should there be changes?
Is the Minister aware of the report submitted and the views subsequently furnished by the Comptroller and Auditor General on the constitutionality of the existing legislation? Does he consider accepting the representations——
The Deputy is also aware of the statement I issued in that connection and as he is a member of the Committee of Public Accounts he will be aware of the legal advice tendered to me and of the fact that determination of the constitutionality of any act is a matter for the courts.
Is the Minister aware of the comments made by the Comptroller and Auditor General following and in relation to the legal advice given to him?
No. I do not think the views of the Comptroller and Auditor General in this matter are relevant. The view of the court is relevant.
In view of the conflicting statements does the Minister not think he should have had another look at it before making the statement which he made?
No, it does not matter what view is expressed by the Comptroller and Auditor General, the courts are the only body competent to express any view on this matter to the effect that the provisions are unconstitutional.
In view of the serious inaccuracy of the advice the Government have got from the Attorney General does the Minister not realise it is time he took this matter seriously?
I do not accept the implication in the question.
Is the Minister suggesting that the Comptroller and Auditor General should test this matter in the courts?
I am suggesting no such thing.
How can they do so?
It does not need to be tested.