Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 5 Dec 1996

Vol. 472 No. 5

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 18, Merchant Shipping (Liability of Shipowners and Others) Bill, 1996 [Seanad] (from the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy) — Order for Report and Report and Final Stages, No. 15, Motion re Defence (Amendment) Act, 1993 and No. 19, Statements on the situation in the Great Lakes Area of Africa (resumed).

It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the proceedings on No. 15, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 12 noon today and the following arrangements shall apply: (1) the speech of a Minister or Minister of State, of the main spokespersons for the Fianna Fáil Party and the Progressive Democrats Party and of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 10 minutes in each case; (2) Members may share time; and (3) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed five minutes. Private Members' Business shall be No. 45 — Motion No. 18 re. Remedial Teachers (resumed).

There is but one matter to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 15 satisfactory? Agreed.

I want to raise three matters with the Tánaiste. Can he update the House on the discussions he engaged in on behalf of the House yesterday?

Following the revelations of the past week, the resultant concern of the public and of all Members of this House in regard to electoral funding issues and the relevant legislation, I suggest that party leaders with the Whips and chairmen of the parties meet within the next week or so before the Christmas recess in an endeavour to resolve the issues raised. This would enable us to bring forward the Electoral Bill early in the next session, providing some type of independent control or audit, thus ensuring appropriate balance.

Having spoken to most of my colleagues and many others in the House, other matters arise such as the review of Members' pay and conditions, with pressures being exerted on Members from all sides of the House. I certainly do not want the public to be given the impression that Members of this House are affluent because most of my colleagues on either side of the House are not. That is another issue that should be given serious consideration within the political domain.

I did not raise the third issue yesterday morning because I had not then checked the unrevised Official Report. On having checked the rulings of the Chair, I contend a word used by the Tánaiste in the course of his contribution on the debate on the nomination of a member of the Government was not in compliance with the relevant order. Therefore, I would ask him kindly to withdraw that remark about me and my colleagues.

I shall deal with those three issues. In response to the last request by the Leader of the Opposition, I withdraw that remark and I do that quite willingly.

I will agree to discussions taking place between the party leaders and Whips on the Electoral Bill, work on which is at a very advanced stage and should be concluded within a matter of days as a matter of urgency.

On the other issue we discussed yesterday, as I informed the Leader of the Opposition, after the Order of Business I established contact with a member of the Dunne family and conveyed the views expressed by party leaders yesterday morning. I outlined the desirability of publishing the Price Waterhouse report in so far as there is a legitimate public interest in it. I received assurances that the company wished to cooperate with the House in every way, subject of course to the legal advice they received. I asked that they contact the Taoiseach's office yesterday afternoon and that was done. The Taoiseach arranged for a meeting to take place in Government Buildings between a representative of the Government and a representative of Dunnes Stores. That meeting took place and, from the reports I received from the Taoiseach, I understand it was a satisfactory one and a followup meeting will take place today.

There are enormous legal complexities, which we will address as a matter of urgency, to secure publication of the report. I am conscious that the Dáil will rise today until Tuesday next but I will undertake to keep party leaders informed of developments over the next few days because this could be unfolding very quickly. Of course, like all party leaders, I will continue my own investigations in this matter.

We in this House have the power to ensure that the contents of that report are disclosed, and we cannot be beholden to anybody, no matter how powerful any family may be. We have the power to ensure that these facts are made known. We have a duty to serve the public, the public interest must come first and newspaper reports that party leaders might see its contents are not sufficient. We cannot have a sanitised version of that report made known or party leaders only seeing its contents. We require full disclosure. People who have nothing to fear have nothing to hide.

If we cannot obtain publication through the family over the next day or so then we should establish a judicial inquiry or one under the Companies Act. We cannot delay this matter which has now continued for almost a week. The public and most Members of this House are becoming frustrated about what is not happening.

May I have the Tánaiste's assurance that if we do not get publication of this report from the family the Government will either establish a tribunal of inquiry, table a motion in the House or use its powers under the Companies Act to ensure full disclosure of this matter.

I resent the implication that someone is beholden to someone else. No member of the Government and, I hope, no Member of the House is beholden to anybody. I gave undertakings in the House yesterday morning and I have responded to the Leader of the main Opposition party again this morning. I also made it clear yesterday morning that, if necessary, we will take other remedies and follow other courses of action.

How long will we have to wait before the family agrees to publish this report?

The Deputy should not be opportunistic.

I am not being opportunistic.

The Deputy should accept the Tánaiste's sincerity.

I will not put up with this nonsense. We have waited almost a week and I would like to know how long more we will have to wait for a response to this matter.

Where did the Deputy's party get its money?

I am making every effort to have this matter sorted out as quickly and expeditiously as possible. Regardless of whether the Leader of the Progressive Democrats likes it, there are legal constraints in regard to such matters. I presume the Deputy, who was a Minister of State, is aware of the legal constraints and of the rights of individuals under natural justice and law which must be respected. I will leave no stone unturned in trying to get to the root of the matter but rights have to be respected.

We alone have the power to ensure that the facts are made public and we should use our powers.

I want to dissuade Members from the notion that they can debate the issue now.

I am fed up with the way the matter is being dealt with.

When will the Foyle Fisheries' Commission Bill be published?

The legislation is at an advanced stage of preparation. I will give the Deputy more details later in the day.

Will the Tánaiste ensure provision is made in the legislation for representation of the fishing industry at commission level? I understand a report compiled by Stokes Kennedy Crowley agrees with the maintenance of the status quo.

The Deputy ought not elaborate now. He has been given the information he sought and he must raise the detail of policy matters at another time.

This is the only cross-Border institution which has existed for 40 years. It is important to maintain it and to ensure the fishing industry is represented at commission level.

Please resume your seat, Deputy McDaid.

The legislation will be available during the first half of 1997. I trust the Deputy accepts that the negotiations are complex as they involve the Irish and UK Governments.

The programme, A Government of Renewal, contains a commitment to revitalise public enterprise and to manage changes in the best interests of employees, taxpayers and consumers. However, no subsidised public transport is available to the thousands of people who require it during the Christmas period.

This matter is not appropriate to the Order of Business and the Deputy knows it.

Barr
Roinn