asked the Taoiseach the commitments given by the present Government in the past month in relation to the constituency of Dublin West; and the estimated cost of each item.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dublin West By-election Commitments.
1.
Information about any specific projects relating to Dublin West or any other area of the country arising from schemes and programmes administered by Government Departments can be obtained by putting down a specific question to the appropriate Minister.
Charlie sent the Minister in and as he is Director of Elections he should know all.
Do I take it that the Minister acting on behalf of the Taoiseach is refusing to give the information requested?
The Deputy may not appreciate, although he should, that there is a time-honoured Question Time procedure here whereby if a Deputy wants specific information about a specific project or a specific matter he puts down a question relating to that specific project or matter to the appropriate Minister. That is the way the system works.
Is it not the system that the Office of the Ceann Comhairle — if the Minister to whom the question is originally directed so requests — disallows the question or has the question reproduced and forwarded to the Minister who is judged appropriate? Why, therefore, did the Taoiseach evidently initially accept Deputy O'Keeffe's question and now produce the sort of answer we have never heard before in this House?
The purpose of the matter is to educate Deputy O'Keeffe and the Fine Gael Party in how the procedures of this House are conducted. The correct procedure is to put down a specific question relating to a specific matter to the particular Minister and that question will be answered fully.
While we are on the subject of education, I wonder if the Minister could give the House some guidance on whether any question in regard to the Government's educational intents in the Dublin West constituency should be addressed to him, as Minister for Agriculture and Director of Elections or to the Minister for Education?
To the Minister for Education.
Will the Minister present be discussing with him what answers he will be giving?
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Quinn.
As part of the educational process on which the Minister for Agriculture has embarked in this House would be confirm for my benefit and that of other younger Members of the House that it has been the practice in the past that questions which, in the view of the Minister for Agriculture are inappropriately or perhaps inadvertently addressed to the Taoiseach, are normally transferred to the relevant Minister? In this instance why was that practice not adhered to? Surely if that practice had been implemented consistently this question would be down to every relevant Minister who had made outrageous promises in Dublin West over the last couple of weeks? Why, therefore, is there not a question down to the Minister for the Environment, the Minister for Education and so on, as has been the normal practice in the past?
The reason is that Deputy O'Keeffe, who put down the question, took the lazy way out by addressing a global question to the Taoiseach when in fact if the proper homework had been done by the Fine Gael and Labour Parties there would have been specific questions down to each Minister.
On a point of order, perhaps the Minister for Agriculture in recent times has been more used to dealing with Libyans and others rather than Members of this Parliament but has it not been the case that the Taoiseach's office——
Is this a point of order, Deputy?
On a point of order, is it not the normal order of this House that such questions are transferred automatically by the Questions Office to the relevant Government Department and that, therefore, the Deputy does not have to put them down?
But the difficulty is that a lazy question was put down by Deputy O'Keeffe in a global manner when it is impossible for the Taoiseach to answer that type of question. If the Fine Gael and Labour Parties had done their homework they would know that the way to do it, item by item and project by project, is to put down specific questions to the relevant Ministers.
It would take weeks to do that.
That is the business of the parties opposite and that is what they should be about in Parliament. They should remember that.
(Interruptions.)
As there are so many Deputies on their feet I will call on Deputy Kelly, who indicated earlier his wish to ask a question.
Is it not the case that the Taoiseach invites the public to suppose that he has an over-view of what the Government are at and that, in pursuit of the creeping Mussolini-ism which he is busily promoting, he is the man who announces all the good news? Therefore is it not perfectly natural for Deputy O'Keeffe to put down such a question knowing that since all these promises represent good news within this part of the world he will get an answer from the man who likes to take the credit for it?
I do not intend to respond to that sort of tin-pot dictatorship comment.
I am somewhat mystified as to what criterion is used in the matter of referring questions to Ministers. Presumably the question put down relates to the Dublin West by-election. I had a question down to the Taoiseach relating to the forthcoming disarmament conference and the question of neutrality asking him to state whether or not he would be emphasising Ireland's neutrality when he attends the United Nations special session, which question was referred back to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Therefore I am somewhat mystified as to what criterion is used.
It is a matter for the Government which Minister answers but there is the question of collective responsibility.
(Interruptions.)
A point of order——
If it is a matter for the Government to decide which Department should answer it surely the Minister for Agriculture is deliberately misleading the House in trying to state that since——
The Deputy cannot use the words "deliberately misleading."
Well, then, perhaps inadvertently misleading the House.
He is inviting suspicion.
As Deputy De Rossa points out, since the Taoiseach's Department saw fit not to have this question transferred to the appropriate Ministers, have they not implicitly accepted responsibility for the answer? Is it not also a fact that the answer that the Minister has given is totally out of order and misleading?
It is a general question, Deputy Quinn and, as such, was addressed to the Taoiseach.
It is not true that the Taoiseach is in the House but has sent the Minister for Agriculture in to the Chamber to answer these questions as punishment for his sins and manifestations in Dublin West?
(Interruptions.)
Deputy L'Estrange and then Deputy O'Keeffe.
I put down the question and I want answers. We are being sent up a blind alley here by stonewalling——
If Deputy O'Keeffe could restrain his colleagues he would get an answer.
Is it not true that the Minister, as Director of Elections, promised nine schools, a community centre, a ring road and dug the scraws for the ring road without having any money to start it? Is it not true also that the Taoiseach in this House on 29 April last stated that all citizens were equal, that the Government would govern fairly and impartially in respect of all citizens? Do the Minister and the Taoiseach believe that before the Dublin West by-election the citizens there were more equal than those of any other part of Ireland?
For three weeks only.
First of all, the question relates to commitments when in fact any action taken by the Government in County Dublin or elsewhere is action taken in the course of on-going business——
(Interruptions.)
——as authorised by this House in the annual budget and in the preparation of Estimates. As far as specific projects in which Deputies may have an interest are concerned — and I hope a real interest — these specific projects should be raised with the appropriate Ministers so that one can have an intelligent question and answer into the merits or otherwise of the specific project. That is what Parliament is about.
Since it appears that the Taoiseach or his Deputy is ashamed to answer for his electoral bribes——
He is shameless.
We have a gaggle of giggle in the Fine Gael Party at the moment. They are like a class of little girls leaving St. Trinians.
(Interruptions.)
Will Deputy O'Keeffe ask his supplementary question?
The Taoiseach picked the right man when he sent in a substitute to evade this question.
Is it the Deputy's intention to ask another supplementary?
It has been my intention for the last ten minutes before Stonewall Lenihan sent us up blind alleys. I want to get back to the subject matter of the question which relates to the commitments of the Government in Dublin West. Since the Minister, standing in for the Taoiseach, was unable to give itemised costings could he, taking all those commitments into account, the schools, the Irish School in Inchicore, the community centre in Ballyfermot, the Chapelizod road, give us the figure for the total cost involved and could he tell us where the moneys are to come from to meet those commitments?
First of all, the Deputy's supplementary presumes that there were commitments.
(Interruptions.)
We are talking about the legitimate expenditure of moneys on projects useful to the community in the particular area. That applies to any other area in the country in any event provided there is reasonable activity and investigation on the part of the Deputies concerned, who should look after their own particular constituencies from now on.
(Interruptions.)
I asked a two-part question. I asked about the overall expenditure and also where the money is to come from. Can I have an answer please?
The Deputy cannot have an answer because there were no commitments.
(Dún Laoghaire): Arising out of the Minister's reply——
We cannot go on like this. We are 15 minutes on this question.
(Dún Laoghaire): Does the Chair not think we are jeopardising the whole system of democracy when people can be given a glib answer to something——
The Deputy knows that the Chair is not responsible for the content of replies. Could Deputy Barrett now ask a supplementary?
(Dún Laoghaire): If people are to behave like Santa Claus during by-elections this Parliament is entitled to know where the money for the promises made is to come from. Does the Minister stand over an action carried out by his Cabinet colleague when he performed the ceremony of the turning of a sod on a road when the contract had not yet been signed and brought with him a firm who had not yet been appointed by Dublin County Council and no order had been given for work to commence? That question must be answered in the House.
I will give one final reply. Every statement made by us during the by-election was a statement made in accordance with proposals that were in the pipeline during the tenure of this Government, the previous Government and the Government before them. These were ongoing matters that needed to be expedited. They were matters of ongoing administration and of no other category. I want to emphasise that. In spite of what the Fine Gael Party are imputing here — I am glad to see the Labour Party are not, with the exception of Deputy Quinn — the whole process was in complete accordance with the Estimates prepared by various Departments and the budget that was eventually passed by the House.
Would the Minister clarify for the House what educational projects are necessary in Dublin West which the Fine Gael Party are opposed to, so that we can tell the voters there what they are?
(Interruptions.)
The Minister said that everything was done in accordance with careful preparation and all the rules. Could he explain how he puts his letter with regard to the alleged community school in Esker into the context of that, given that the Department of Education repudiated that commitment immediately afterwards and said there was no authority whatever to give it and that in fact it did not represent the true position?
If Deputy FitzGerald is aware of the situation, we are now talking about the semantics of naming the type of school. The question relates to the estimated cost of each item. That is the matter I am dealing with. I am concerned about the probity of public expenditure.
We are concerned about the probity of the democratic process. The Minister went without authority into an area to promise something, knowing that that was contrary to what the Government had decided and what was going to happen. Is it not an example of probity to the people of Dublin West and to this House?
On a point of order, and in a fairly full House, could I draw the Chair's attention to an allegation that was made by Deputy Barrett, who is this year's Chairman of Dublin County Council, to the effect that a Minister of the Government, a Member of this House, in what can only be described as a most potentially corrupt manner, brought on to a site representatives of a firm of contractors conveying the impression that they were the contractors for a project which was sanctioned? Is that not a matter for the Committee on Procedures and Privileges of which you are the head?
That is a matter for Members to bring before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
You are in charge of this House. Could I ask you, in your unique position as Chairman with special responsibility for maintaining standards in the House, to take what is a very serious allegation made by the Whip of the Fine Gael Party——
That is something which occurred outside this House if it happened, and as such——
I do not want to be disruptive on this but when we strip away all the pieces of fun which have gone on here for the last few minutes and the Minister for Agriculture wriggling out of commitments which were made, what is implicit in this is far more serious. There is a Government Minister with moneys voted by this House, a member of a Government we have to vote on, who are not a majority Government, who have gone on to a site with a contractor, giving the impression that this person was getting the money. Let us stop fooling around. This is most serious. It is an allegation which should be responded to. If Cabinet responsibility exists then in all honesty you are obliged to respond to it because we are not playacting any more.
The Chair has no knowledge of that. I suggest whoever has knowledge of it and can produce the necessary evidence, should bring the matter to the attention of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
(Interruptions.)
Would the Minister not agree that the conduct of the Government party in the recent by-election, as has been accurately described here this afternoon, is endangering parliamentary democracy and that it is responsible in the main for the disillusionment of young people in the parliamentary process? When in the name of God will the Government stop it?
(Interruptions.)
The Government are doing damage for no gain.
(Interruptions.)
Do the Government not feel any responsibility towards this democratically elected parliament?
We feel responsibility for rehabilitating the Labour Party because the low vote secured by them is the most debilitating thing that has happened to Irish democracy in our time.
(Interruptions.)
Ceist a 3.
On a point of order, is the Minister aware that two or three weeks ago Deputy Enda Kenny put down a question to the Taoiseach——
That is not a point of order.
It is in relation to the point I am going to make. That question was deferred. It related to all publicity and advertising contracts that had been placed by each Department, as can be seen from Question No. 497 to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. Why was the same not done in respect of all Departments in relation to Dublin West?
That is a separate question. I am answering one question here.
(Interruptions.)
Order. We have spent more than 20 minutes on this question.
Unless there is some new development, I will not ask any other question but this one: assuming that I heard the Minister correctly when he stated that every one of the commitments given by the Government during the by-election campaign was accounted for already in departmental Estimates, may I take it as a solemn assurance that in no Supplementary Estimate to come before the House between now and the end of the year will there be any item relating to any of the commitments given last month? May we take it that any Supplementary Estimate to come before us will not contain any item of expenditure relating to any commitment given during the Dublin West by-election campaign?
There were no commitments and anything said on the Government side during the by-election related to ongoing business.
(Interruptions.)
I am calling the next question.
On a point of order, we have been treated here for 20 minutes to what is the usual conduct so far as the Minister for Agriculture is concerned.
The Chair is responsible for the conduct of the House.
As a Member of this House and as the one who put down the question, I am protesting at the manner in which the matter has been dealt with by the Taoiseach and by the Minister deputising for him. I am protesting that the details I sought were not furnished and I endorse totally everything that has been said by Deputy Cluskey. This is the type of conduct that will lead to total cynical disillusionment with politics. I am hoping that such conduct will not be accepted in the future.
In view of the reply given, can you rule that any question put down specifically to a Minister will not be subject to the six-month rule?
Yes. I would have to give that assurance.
Deputy Shatter rose.
If this is not a point of order, I cannot allow it.
On a point of order, I have been trying since 2.35 to ask a supplementary question. Am I not entitled to a supplementary?
I am sorry but that is not a point of order.
Question No. 2 postponed.