Vol. 270 No. 1
asked the Taoiseach if he will make available to Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas copies of the statements submitted by counsel for the Attorney General and the Government in the High Court case Boland versus the Government and the Attorney General.
2.
asked the Taoiseach if he will give clarification of Paragraph 5 of the Sunningdale communiqué and its significance in relation to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution.
3.
asked the Taoiseach whether the document known as the Sunningdale agreement has been or will be laid before Dáil Éireann in accordance with Article 29.5.1º of the Constitution; and, if not, why?
4.
asked the Taoiseach whether any charge on public funds is involved in the Sunningdale agreement; and, if so, when Dáil Éireann will be asked to approve of the terms of the agreement.
5.
asked the Taoiseach whether any part of the Sunningdale agreement will become the domestic law of the State; and, if so, whether steps are being taken to have the matter determined by the Oireachtas in accordance with Article 29.6 of the Constitution.
6.
asked the Taoiseach if he will state in connection with the next meeting of the Sunningdale participants, the issues which require to be dealt with; and whether Dáil Éireann and the people will have an opportunity of considering them.
7.
asked the Taoiseach whether Dáil Éireann will have an opportunity beforehand of considering the document arising out of the Sunningdale agreement which is to be lodged with the United Nations.
With your permission, A Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 7 together.
As the time for an appeal in the High Court action relating to the Sunningdale agreement has not yet elapsed, I do not propose to go into the matter at this stage.
Could I ask the Taoiseach whether, in fact, he considers that the matters raised in Questions Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 are related in any way to the action pending, if it is pending, in the Supreme Court?
They are all related and I thought it well to deal with them all together.
In connection with the first part of Question No. 4, is the Taoiseach not aware that, in his absence when he visited Denmark for the summit meeting of the Common Market Prime Ministers, the Tánaiste, in the course of the reply to the Adjournment Debate prior to the Christmas Recess, said that since there were matters in the Sunningdale communiqué which would require payment out of Exchequer funds and since he gave it as his opinion or his information that all of the Sunningdale agreement would be part of a subsequent agreement to be ratified, the agreement would have to be ratified by the Dáil, and is that not the case? There is no question of sub judice being involved there.
No, but until the agreement is signed the Dáil will not ratify it.
The first part of Question No. 4 asks if there would be a charge on public funds. Is it not a fact that there would be?
Wait until the agreement is signed first and then we can discuss it.
Further arising——
Question No. 8. We cannot have an argument on this matter. It is sub judice.
It is information simply and solely that I am looking for, and that is whether the matter in the various questions is sub judice, whether the appeal has been lodged, and whether the Ceann Comhairle and his office are so aware and have been so informed.
The time for the lodgment of the appeal does not expire until tomorrow.
The appeal has not been lodged as yet?
I do not know. The time for its lodgment does not expire until tomorrow.
There is nothing before the courts at this moment?
If there is a general election in England will the agreement go by the board?
No.
Is there anything before the courts at the moment on this matter or is there not? Surely that is the point as to whether it is or is not sub judice.
I want to assure the Leader of the Opposition that of course the undertaking given by the Tánaiste will be honoured at the appropriate time.
I did not expect that it would be otherwise. I wanted to draw the Taoiseach's attention to it.
Can we take it that on the so-called Sunningdale agreement nothing will be proceeded with unless and until an appeal has been lodged and disposed of in regard to the constitutionality of the matter? In other words, will all matters in regard to it cease: movement by the Government, participation, getting on with it, and so forth? Will everything stop if we cannot even talk about it here?
No.
Surely it is totally and absolutely wrong——
Question No. 8.
On a point of order, it seems that Question No. 7 deals with the Order of Business of this House and is the Taoiseach seriously suggesting to the House that he is not in a position to answer Question No. 7 because of some pending case in the courts?
I have already explained that when the agreement is signed it will be discussed by the Dáil. Until it is signed it cannot be discussed.
It is being proceeded with. That is what I am concerned about and that is why I have these questions down.
So were many agreements in the past. They were always discussed. The Deputy was a Minister for a long time and he knows all about the procedures.
He does.
He is fully aware.
I am aware that we do not tie down the Government and the future of the country without referring the matter to the House.
We shall have to proceed to the next question.
We are dodging the issue on this matter of sub judice. The Ceann Comhairle knows it is not sub judice. Otherwise it would not be on the Order Paper today.
