Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 27 Mar 1980

Vol. 319 No. 5

Appointment of Ministers of State

The Taoiseach

A Cheann Comhairle, b'áil liom cead a chur in iúl, mar eolas don Dáil, go bhfuil an Rialtas tar éis na Teachtaí seo a leanas a cheapadh mar Airí Stáit mar a leanas:

A Cheann Comhairle, I beg leave to announce for the information of the Dáil, that the Government have appointed the following Deputies to be Ministers of State, as follows:

Tomás Ó Maonaigh	Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Tionscail, Tráchtála
	agus Turasóireachta.
(Tom Meaney	Minister of State at the Department of Industry, Commerce and Tourism).
Tomás Ó Nualláin	Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Sláinte agus ag an Roinn Leasa Shóisialaigh
(Tom Nolan	Minister of State at the Department of Health and at the Department of Social Welfare),
Breandán Ó Dálaigh	Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Saothair
(Brendan Daly	Minister of State at the Department of Labour),
Pádraic Ó Floinn	Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Iompair
(Pádraic Flynn	Minister of State at the Department of Transport),
	agus
	(and)
Seán Ó Dochartaigh	Aire Stáit ag an Roinn Dli agus Cirt
(Seán Doherty	Minister of State at the Department of Justice).

Dr. FitzGerald

I understand that, by agreement, I can make some comment on the announcement just made.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is no such agreement, and there can be no debate on an announcement without prior agreement.

The Taoiseach

Unfortunately, there is no prior agreement. I understand Deputy FitzGerald's position in this matter. I would have been very happy to have brief comments from the Leaders of the Opposition Parties on these appointments but unfortunately we were not able to come to an agreement for such a procedure.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair would like to make the position clear, in case he is put in the wrong light. Announcements are not subject to debate. Prior to 1947 announcements were not even necessarily made in the House. At the request of one of my predecessors it was arranged that these announcements would be made for the purpose of the record, but without any debate because no Dáil agreement is necessary. There is no motion before the House. They come under the same heading as any other announcement to the House; they are not much different from the Ceann Comhairle announcing a Message from the Seanad.

Dr. FitzGerald

When the last announcements were made, while it was suggested there was not a precedent, eventually it was agreed statements could be made, and statements were made, thereby establishing a precedent. I understood that to be the position.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle was in the Chair when that happened and I am sure the Ceann Comhairle would have taken the same line. If there was agreement, the Chair would reluctantly have accepted it on the grounds that a precedent was not being established. If we are going to have debate on every announcement we could have them frequently because announcements are made frequently in the House.

Mr. Cluskey

The Taoiseach sought to have a departure from what has taken place before yesterday and I refuse to agree with the Taoiseach's proposal that the leader of Fine Gael and myself could speak for ten minutes and he would be given the right to reply for five minutes. That would have been a departure.

An Ceann Comhairle

That the Chair then——

Mr. Cluskey

Apparently what is at stake here is not the rules of this House, not the rights of the Opposition, but the Taoiseach trying to nail down this House as he has every other Department over whom he has control. He has no control over me or this party and we are not prepared to go along with that.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is not accommodating anybody. The Chair is upholding what is the firmly established rule that has always been observed. I ask the Deputy to seat himself now.

Mr. Cluskey

It was not observed a short few weeks ago. There is no objection from this party if the Taoiseach wants to get up and speak for an hour or two hours to justify what he has done this morning.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair would have something to say to that.

Mr. Cluskey

We insist on the right to be able to comment on what the Taoiseach has done. Your interpretation of what is an announcement debars us from our rights and our responsibility in this House. You have changed that from a statement to an announcement.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a vast difference. The Deputy knows well that the Chair in not creating any new procedure.

Mr. Cluskey

I do not know.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am merely carrying out what my predecessors since 1947 have carried out. Prior to 1947 these announcements need not have been made. It was only then that it was arranged for the purpose of the record for the convenience of the office.

Mr. Cluskey

I am not prepared to go along quietly with the Taoiseach's approach to national affairs. If you cannot bully them, buy them. I intend to comment.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Lenihan)

That is disgraceful.

An Ceann Comhairle

If there is no agreement we will move to the next business.

Mr. Cluskey

We are entitled to comment.

Dr. FitzGerald

On the last occasion that precedent was established and I do not understand in what circumstances it is being disestablished now. There was some argument about it at the time and finally agreement was reached that there should be comments from leaders of the Opposition. I do not understand by what process the right thus established in this House is being extinguished or at whose insistence or why the precedent is being eliminated at this stage. I protest against that because the matter was settled on that occasion, not without argument and a brief statement was made. He did not speak for long, and there are no grounds for going back on it. If the Taoiseach is anxious to speak on the subject, he has the opportunity to do so. I see no difficulty about that. Indeed, I thought he was going to say something about the appointments.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is not concerned whether this is of convenience to the Taoiseach. The last occasion was accepted exceptionally by the Chair and the Chair made it clear that it was not establishing a precedent.

Dr. FitzGerald

I do not recall anything of the kind. On the contrary, what was established was a precedent and the rights thus established should not be extinguished so lightly at anybody's insistence, even on a proposal of the Taoiseach. If the Taoiseach wishes to speak on this, as the leader of the Labour Party has said, I am always willing to hear him. We have established a right to comment on the appointments made and I would like to exercise that right briefly. I would have exercised it with more brevity than the time taken up so far to oblige the Taoiseach.

An Ceann Comhairle

I appreciate the anxiety of the Deputy that there was some question of an agreement, but as far as the Chair is concerned I have no notice of an agreement and I am compelled to adhere to the ruling.

Dr. FitzGerald

If there is no agreement the Chair must follow precedent as on the last occasion.

An Ceann Comhairle

The last occasion was an exception and was not a precedent.

Mr. Cluskey

You made a ruling that there would be no debate. I am not seeking a debate. I am seeking the right to comment on the appointment of five Ministers of State. Surely in a democratic parliament I have that right.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not like the ruling of the Chair to be confused by people claiming to be deprived of democratic rights and so forth. All Standing Orders are laid down and it is the duty of the Ceann Comhairle to interpret them as they have been interpreted. That is what the Chair is doing. There has never been nor was ever intended to be a debate on an announcement. Whenever the House agreed that there should be——

Mr. Harte

Has there been an announcement before?

An Ceann Comhairle

Whenever the House agreed the Chair would be reluctant to go against an agreement of the House. It would on this occasion too.

Mr. Harte

This is acting without precedent.

An Ceann Comhairle

No precedent is established.

Mr. Cluskey

Am I to take it that the House is being denied the right even to comment on the appointment of five new Ministers of State because the Taoiseach will not agree?

The Taoiseach

No.

Mr. Cluskey

That is what the Chair has said.

The Taoiseach

I want to make my position clear for the benefit particularly of Deputy FitzGerald in this matter. I was anxious that the leaders of the Opposition would have an opportunity to comment on this matter even though it is technically an announcement and might have been made outside the House. There is no compulsion on me to make this announcement in the House. Nevertheless, out of courtesy and in an endeavour to have all important announcements made in this House, which is my policy, I was hoping that I could make an announcement and have an agreement whereby the leaders of the Opposition parties would have been enabled to comment. The proposal I put forward was agreed by the Fine Gael Party but Deputy Cluskey of the Labour Party refused to go along with it.

Mr. Cluskey

That is right.

The Taoiseach

Therefore, we had no option but to leave the matter to the Chair. As far as we are concerned, we would be anxious that the Opposition parties would have an opportunity to make some brief comments on the appointments. The Opposition parties already had an opportunity to discuss this matter fully when this legislation was introduced. Notwithstanding that, I recognise that the leaders of the Opposition parties might wish to comment briefly this morning and I would have prefered to go along with that if an arrangement could have been made.

Mr. Cluskey

The Taoiseach has quoted me. I would have no objection if the Taoiseach were to take five hours in speaking on trying to justify the announcement or statement he has made here this morning in relation to the creation of five new Ministers. He could spend all day. I accepted that I would be restricted to ten minutes but I was not prepared to go along with the Taoiseach changing the rules to suit himself. I know that he has done it elsewhere successfully with civil servants and other people who could not defend themselves. I can defend myself and my parliamentary right. I can defend democracy, and I will.

(Interruptions.)

Dr. FitzGerald

I can understand that proposals are made and agreement not reached on them. In those circumstances one reverts to the precedents. I claim by precedent set on the last occasion, because there is no such thing as acceptance, to be allowed to make such a statement.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair does not accept that there was a precedent in this case. It was allowed exceptionally the last time because the House agreed. In anything the House agrees on, if it is possible the Chair is anxious to accommodate that agreement. I have no notice of any such agreement and in making my decision I am not accommodating anybody. I am only upholding the rules laid down.

Mr. Cluskey

May I take it by that that, although the offer has been made to the Taoiseach, he can take as long as he likes and that I—I do not know about Deputy FitzGerald—would be prepared to confine myself to ten minutes, so that the Taoiseach is in effect debarring this House and the leaders of the Opposition parties from even commenting briefly?

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cluskey

There is no response. That is it.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cluskey

The Taoiseach has run away from his responsibilities ever since the day he was elected.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

Dr. FitzGerald

I do not know if the Taoiseach appreciated that, when seeking the right of reply at the end, he appears to think that a precedent established has been called into question. On the last occasion it was agreed that we would comment. He has introduced a new element by seeking the right of reply. For my part, I would be happy to concede that, but there is no agreement on it. That being so, I do not feel that the Taoiseach would or should wish to use his request for the right of reply, and the failure to agree to that, as grounds for departing from the precedent set and agreed on the last occasion, which would give us the right of comment.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Dr. FitzGerald

It was that right of comment that I was speaking about.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair must emphasise again that the Deputy should not be naive about this. The Chair was not informed of any prior agreement, or is not aware of any prior agreement. On the last occasion, exceptionally, the House agreed and the Chair did not object. That is not a precedent. There is no agreement on this occasion; therefore we must revert to what has always been the situation. There is no way in which we can——

Dr. FitzGerald

Then, Sir, am I to understand—to clarify the situation finally—that the Chair understands the position to be that the Taoiseach's change of position from the last occasion, when he agreed to our commenting, has had the effect of preventing our commenting on this occasion?

The Taoiseach

No, that is not so.

Dr. FitzGerald

The onus now falls on the Taoiseach in the matter, because I had understood that it is a question for the Chair. Is it now suggested that the Taoiseach by claiming the right of reply and insisting on that, is debarring us from commenting, as on the last occasion, by agreement?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is not aware of any agreement or of any discussions that went on regarding agreement.

Mr. Cluskey

As far as I am concerned, it is quite obvious that the Taoiseach has no intention of allowing us to comment on the Taoiseach's statement.

The Taoiseach

That is right.

Mr. Cluskey

The Government would apparently interpret it as effectively debarring us from our democratic right. I am quite satisfied that the people will judge it for what it is.

Mr. Harte

Could I ask, before the House deals with Item No. 1, when the Taoiseach considers that Northern Ireland will be a high priority, why has he not assigned one of the new Ministers to that portfolio? Why has he not given responsibility for that? Would the Taoiseach inform the House who is responsible now for Northern Ireland—the Taoiseach's Office or the Minister for Foreign Affairs?

Mr. Cluskey

Could I ask one question? Is it a precedent that the Parliamentary Secretary or a Minister of State has been appointed by a Minister who is not in the House? Where is Deputy O'Malley? Would the Taoiseach like to comment on my question?