I was very concerned about the alleged interference by the Minister in the day-to-day operation of a State-aided board made in the Sunday Independent of 22 January 1995. The article was headed “Minister ordered confidential files to be removed from Dublin office” and another read, “Taylor's interference sparks legal board row”.
Will the Minister for Equality and Law Reform confirm that on the days leading up to last Christmas a senior member of his departmental staff, under his direction, called to the Dublin headquarters of the Legal Aid Board when the chief executive and the assistant chief executive were absent and removed files? Will the Minister confirm also that that official subjected Legal Aid Board staff to questioning which continued late into the evening and that his departmental official ordered members of the staff not to discuss what had happened or what was said to their superiors in the Legal Aid Board? Will he confirm that it is his view, as expressed on "Morning Ireland" last Monday that the Legal Aid Board is not independent in the exercise of its functions under the civil legal aid scheme? Will the Minister further acknowledge that this action by him constitutes a gross and unwarranted political interference in the internal affairs of an independent board?
Why did the Minister not raise his concerns with the Chairman or the chief executive of the board or was it not a simple matter to inquire from the Legal Aid Board the basis on which the appointment was made? I understand the appointment was fully above board and in keeping with the best practice. Did the Minister not consider the embarrassment which his action might cause to the woman who got the job and to the members of the board? I consider the key question is whether the Minister knew that an instruction was issued by his Department to an official to order staff in the Legal Aid Board not to disclose to their superiors what had happened or what was said during the inquiry. Did the Minister issue the instruction, approve of the steps taken or know what had been done? If he did, then he is gravely at fault in undermining the independence of this important board which has had widespread support. The very least he should do in the circumstances is to apologise to the board and to the House. I invite the Minister to reply.