Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 7 Jul 1982

Vol. 337 No. 6

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EEC Housing Aid.

1.

asked the Taoiseach the steps, if any, he took at the recent European Council meeting to seek agreement on the proposed EEC aid for housing in Belfast; and the steps he took to secure the presence of a member of the Government at the meeting of the Ministerial Council on the day on which this matter was discussed by that Council.

The Government have given their full support at every appropriate stage of the Community's decision-making procedures to this proposal. The Minister for Foreign Affairs attended in the normal way the last Council at which it was discussed. It was clear, from consultations which the Minister had with the President of the Council and other delegations, that no decision would be taken on the proposal at the meeting. The matter was not, in fact, reached until late on the last day of meetings extending over three days, after the Minister had had to leave to return to Dublin. In his absence, a statement, which the Minister had personally approved, was made by our Permanent Representative urging an immediate favourable decision for political, economic and humanitarian reasons. The Council then decided to continue its examination of the proposal which we will continue to support.

Is the Taoiseach aware that the German Minister who is opposing this — and Germany is indeed the main source of opposition — stayed until the end of the meeting to make his objections known and to ensure it did not go through and that the absence of the Irish and British Ministers appeared unhelpful to other members of the Council and gave the impression that we were not as serious as the Germans? Would the Taoiseach not agree that when matters of this kind which deeply concern us in this island arise we should not give the impression that we are not interested and leave it to those who are opposed to action to make the running?

That is a mean, despicable suggestion. The Deputy is doing this proposal no good or not adding to his chances of success by bringing it up here in this political context.

Is it true or not?

He knows perfectly well that both I and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Government fully support this proposal and will do everything open to us at any stage of Community affairs to support it. The circumstances of the meeting to which the Deputy refers were not at all as the Deputy has endeavoured to describe them. Our Minister was compelled to leave that three-day meeting because of the necessity to be back in Dublin and had already fully ascertained the position from other delegations before he left and had made specific arrangements for our views to be put forward. The interpretation which Deputy FitzGerald is endeavouring now to put on the circumstances is an unworthy one.

Would the Taoiseach not agree that the wording and tone of his response suggests a certain sense of unease or guilt in relation to the matter? Is he not aware that when matters that particularly concern the country arise in the Council it is customary for the Minister concerned to remain and make personal representations? Is he further aware in relation to his accusations in respect of myself that I have taken all possible steps in this matter, including raising it as Taoiseach directly with the French President and in Opposition as one of the countries most directly concerned with a view to helping the Government and all of us in achieving this result?

The Deputy, in endeavouring to make a cheap political scoring point out of it now, is not doing the proposition any good. His raising it here in this manner is detrimental. His attempt to score a cheap debating point over the Minister for Foreign Affairs about the meeting in question is unworthy of him. If we are going to start going into Community affairs I might have to go back over some of the contributions made by Deputy FitzGerald at Council of Europe meetings which were not to the benefit of this country. I am refraining from doing that. However, if Deputy FitzGerald persists in this course of political harassment I may have to start taking the gloves off too.

I suggest the Taoiseach's reaction is typical of the reaction from him in recent times.

I am getting a bit tired of their self-righteousness.

There has been a constant stream of threats and innuendo. There are threats that things will be revealed when there is nothing to reveal. That does not add to the stature of this House.

Could we have a question, please?

The question I am concerned about here is whether the Taoiseach realises — and it appears he does not — that the Government have duties in this matter and when they do not fulfil them it is our duty on the opposite side of the House to pursue the matter to ensure that there will be no repetition of this kind of event. That is what Opposition is about and the Taoiseach when he was in Opposition was quite uninhibited in that regard, and properly so. If we see any dereliction of duty on the other side of the House, no matter what language or tone of voice the Taoiseach uses, we will pursue the matter; no matter what threats he uses we will pursue the matter.

My reaction to this attempt by Deputy FitzGerald to score a cheap political debating point about a three-day meeting of the Council of Ministers is very understandable because he knows, and he has been assured time and again, that we are just as interested in promoting this proposal as he was and is. I do not think he is doing the proposal or the people who are anxious for the proposal any good by raising it here in this political context.

(Interruptions.)

I want to assert that there was no dereliction of duty at that Council meeting or any other Council meeting by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in this regard.

I am entitled to my view that the Taoiseach's Government are not doing the proposal any good when they do not have ministerial attendance at the meeting when it is discussed and leave it to the chief opponent. My view is as least as valid as the Taoiseach's.

So far as political point scoring is concerned, the past is best forgotten. Why was the Minister compelled to leave after three days? Why had he to return here? Did he look for a pair? Does he not know that as far as our party are concerned we would be generous in giving pairs in the national interest in this case?

When I am here they are whinging and when I am not here they are whinging.

Will the Deputy ask a question?

Why was the Minister compelled to leave? Did he look for a pair? Does he not know that we would be generous in this case? The House and the nation are entitled to know.

All I can say about that is that the word "generosity" is not appropriate to those benches over there.

(Interruptions.)

We are not going to go into that.

Will the Taoiseach answer the question? We are entitled to know.

Is the Taoiseach aware that the position is that since this Dáil started we have never refused a pair for public business and we do not refuse pairs in relation to attendance at ministerial councils whether they last one, two or three days and any such request will be granted in the national interest? In those circumstances will the Taoiseach withdraw his remark?

I was not talking about pairing when I made the remark about generosity.

That is what the question was about.

I was talking about the quality of generosity and charity and humanity in political debate.

(Interruptions.)

The case rests after that remark.

In view of the fact that many, if not all, of us would be sorry to earn that rebuke of ungenerosity or of indulging in cheap and low politics——

Could the Deputy ask a question?

Could the Taoiseach sketch out some guidelines which would enable us to distinguish between a legitimate point of ordinary opposition and what he apparently obsessively regards as personal attacks upon himself? He occupies that office and——

You are not permitted to make a speech at Question Time. You know that better than anyone.

We do not like being accused of being cheap and ungenerous.

You will have other opportunities but not during Question Time. You are being disorderly, although I know it is not your intention.

Barr
Roinn