Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 9 Jul 1997

Vol. 480 No. 2

Order of Business.

The Taoiseach

It is proposed to take No. 2 — Election of Leas-Cheann Comhairle; No. 3 — motion re Leave to introduce Supplementary Estimates — Votes 6 and 32 — and, subject to the agreement of No. 3, to take Supplementary Estimates, Votes 6 and 32; No. 4 — motion re United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification; No. 5 — motion re Criminal Justice (Drug Trafficking) Act, l996 and No. 1 — Registration of Title (Amendment) Bill, l997, Order for Second Stage and Second and Remaining Stages.

It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that:

(1) No. 3 shall be decided without debate and any division demanded thereon shall be taken forthwith;

(2) Subject to the agreement of No. 3, Supplementary Estimates, Votes 6 and 32, shall be moved together and decided without debate by one Question which shall be put from the Chair; and any division demanded thereon shall be taken forthwith;

(3) No. 4 shall be decided without debate;

(4) The proceedings on No. 5, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion after one hour and the following arrangements shall apply:

(i) The speech of a Minister or Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case;

(ii) The speech of each other Member called upon shall not exceed 5 minutes in each case;

(iii) Members may share time;

(iv) A Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed 5 minutes; and

(5) Private Members' Business shall also take place tomorrow — item No. 8 — motion re local Government funding.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 3, Supplementary Estimates, agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with Supplementary Estimates — Votes 6 and 32 — agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 4 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 5 agreed? Agreed. Is it agreed that Private Members' time be taken tomorrow? Agreed.

Mr. J. Bruton

Does the Taoiseach agree in principle the Dáil will have to make arrangements in the ordering of its future business to provide for a formal inquiry to establish whether vast personal donations were made by wealthy individuals other than Mr. Dunne to Mr. Haughey during the time Mr. Haughey was Taoiseach and while Deputy Ahern and others served with him in Government, and to establish that such personal donations to the then serving Taoiseach in no way affected decisions taken by the Government?

An Ceann Comhairle

I find it difficult to relate the Deputy's question to what is permitted under Standing Orders. There is a motion on the Order Paper concerning an aspect of this matter.

Mr. J. Bruton

My question relates to possible future business. Does the Taoiseach agree in principle the Dáil should adopt a motion for an inquiry into this matter and will the Government promote such a motion?

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a motion on the Order Paper concerning an aspect of this matter and it will be in order to raise the matter only when that motion is taken.

Mr. J. Bruton

On a point of order, that is a Private Members' motion, but I am inquiring about Government business. The Order of Business is about Government business and I am asking if the Government will bring forward a motion to provide for an inquiry to establish whether other people made personal donations to Mr. Haughey when he was Taoiseach and serving in Government with Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats and if those donations influenced Government decisions.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputies may raise on the Order of Business only matters relating to legislation promised.

Mr. J. Bruton

For the past two and a half years questions of this nature were allowed by the then serving Ceann Comhairle and I answered them. Is the Taoiseach willing to say in principle that he will provide for an inquiry to establish whether other wealthy individuals gave money to Mr. Haughey while Deputy Ahern was a Government Minister serving with Mr. Haughey?

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not arise on the Order of Business and I am not aware of legislation promised in this regard.

Mr. J. Bruton

Will the Taoiseach indicate whether he will promote a motion on this subject? Does he agree in principle this matter needs to be inquired into, yes or no?

The Taoiseach

If aspects are not dealt with in the report when presented to the House, the Government will be happy to consider the matter. I have an open mind on these matters. Some of the issues of today and of the tribunal set up by this House are a matter of grave concern to me and to all those involved in the political process. I have consistently taken the view that these matters should be fully dealt with. If under the terms of the present inquiry all the issues cannot be dealt with that will be clear in due course. Witnesses have still to come before the tribunal and questions raised may be relevant to the issue referred to by Deputy Bruton. The report will be debated in the House and if aspects are not covered we will consider the matter. We owe it to the tribunal to allow it complete its work properly and if there are issues not completed in the public interest we will consider them.

Mr. J. Bruton

Payments made by individuals other than Mr. Dunne are not covered by the inquiry. The Taoiseach is therefore aware there is a need for an inquiry on payments made by other people to Mr. Haughey.

Mr. Spring

On the business of this House and how we intend to order business for the rest of this session, I recall the Taoiseach, as Leader of the Opposition, on 6 February 1997 when addressing this House, said that what matters most is how a political party reacts to knowledge when it becomes available. Today is an extraordinary day in Irish politics when the former Taoiseach and Leader of Fianna Fáil admitted receiving £1.3 million from Ben Dunne, having denied it over recent months. As Deputy Bruton stated, it is obvious that contributions made to Mr. Haughey by other business people must be investigated as a matter of urgency by this House. I ask that the House sit late to consider the implications of the admissions made to the tribunal today following many months of denial.

I understand that the Progressive Democrats are disturbed by this morning's admission at the tribunal. If Deputy Harney was sitting on this side of the House, its proceedings would not cease until she received answers in respect of this matter.

Mr. D. Carey

It would not be good enough.

Mr. Spring

In view of the Taoiseach's statement on 6 February, this House should sit either immediately following receipt of the report or it should sit to consider how we may obtain information, in the interests of politics in this country, on other donations made to Mr. Haughey while he served as Taoiseach — and while Members served in Government with him — and the effect they had on Government policy at that time.

The Taoiseach

As already stated, I agree with the view expressed by the chairman that the appropriate time for the Houses of the Oireachtas to consider the nature and scope of any further inquiries into the so-called Ansbacher deposits or any other matters will be when all the evidence has been taken and the tribunal has reported. When the report is received and we become aware of the precise action required we will deal with such matters.

Mrs. Owen

About what is the Taoiseach concerned?

The Taoiseach

The right to indignation does not belong to Members on any side of the House in respect of these kinds of matters.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach

As far as I am concerned, I deem today's revelations to be both tragic and deplorable. These matters must be dealt with fully and as Leader of the Government I can inform the House that they will be dealt with in that manner at the proper time.

Proinsias De Rossa

I welcome the Taoiseach's statement that he regards these revelations, which could have far reaching effects on politics and politicians, as deplorable. Will he give a commitment to the House that he will implement fully any recommendations which arise from the McCracken tribunal?

The Taoiseach

Yes.

Mr. J. Bruton

Does the Taoiseach not agree it is already clear that the Dunnes tribunal will not cover other donations that may have been made to Mr. Haughey? If Mr. Haughey received £1.3 million from one donor, there must be a possibility that he received similar contributions from other donors. Does the Taoiseach agree in principle that at the appropriate time there should be an inquiry into possible donations by other persons——

Mrs. O'Rourke

To all politicians.

Mr. J. Bruton

——given that the Dunnes tribunal is confined to dealing with donations made by Dunnes Stores?

The Taoiseach

I am not sure whether the House should be debating this issue.

An Ceann Comhairle

No, it should not.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Spring quoted from a statement I made in February last. If we were to comply with Deputy Bruton's request, the inquiry would have to be extended to cover everyone's dealings during the past ten years, if not beyond. Are we becoming involved in a broad range of inquiries? I suggest that fair progress could be made when the conclusions reached in the report of the inquiry are published. Mr. Haughey must go before the tribunal to answer questions. I am sure he will be asked such questions and it is advisable to await the outcome of that process. If there are obvious issues to be dealt with following publication of the report, we will do so at that time. The report will be debated and dealt with by the House.

Deputy Bruton and others have asked what action we will take. I must inform them that we will obtain the report — which the chairman has asked to be allowed to conclude — and deal with its recommendations. If there are other aspects required to be dealt with, we can debate them at that stage. I believe that is very reasonable.

Mr. J. Bruton

Is the Taoiseach suggesting that we cannot have further inquiries into donations that might have been made by other people to a former Taoiseach without inquiring into the business of every Member of the House? Is that his position? If so, it is a ludicrous one. A Prime Minister in any other Western European democracy has not admitted receiving £1.3 million as a gift from a private businessman. It has not happened anywhere in the European Union since its foundation or in any European country since the war. This is very serious and the Taoiseach's suggestion that we cannot have an inquiry unless we investigate the affairs of all 166 Members of the House shows he does not understand the seriousness of the revelations.

The Taoiseach

I will not cover anybody. We will deal comprehensively with the report. The Deputy need not worry.

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot have a debate on this matter. If Deputies wish they may put down a motion.

Mr. J. Bruton

The Taoiseach is slow enough in dealing with this matter.

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot have a debate.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please. We cannot have a debate on this matter. The issue does not arise on the Order of Business. Members will have a more appropriate way of pursuing this matter in due course.

Mr. Spring

I understand the Taoiseach intends to adjourn the House tomorrow until 30 September. The Taoiseach accepts we cannot have further inquiries about donations made by business to the former Taoiseach, Mr. Haughey, who of his own volition admitted receiving £1.3 million. Will the Taoiseach provide for a sitting of the House either next week or before the end of the month to consider these matters further? The matter warrants this because it will take us all a long time to recover our credibility as politicians after today's admission.

An Ceann Comhairle

Perhaps the Whips can meet to consider this matter. We can have no further debate on it in the House at present.

Mr. Howlin

What is the Government's view?

An Ceann Comhairle

It is a matter for the Whips to decide upon.

The Taoiseach

I understand the report of the tribunal will be received during the summer. The recommendations will be implemented at that stage and any other——

Mr. Howlin

The terms of reference include——

The Taoiseach

The Deputy does not wish to listen?

Mr. J. Bruton

The best way for the Taoiseach to avoid unnecessary conflict in the House is to agree in principle to a further investigation in view of what we already know about the inadequacy of the Dunnes Tribunal's terms of reference and the fact that Mr. Haughey has admitted receiving £1.3 million from one donor. We need to know about other potential donors. Will the Taoiseach agree in principle to the need for an inquiry? Whether it is instituted at the end of the present inquiry or before is a matter that can be decided later. If the Taoiseach did this, as I suggested 20 minutes ago, there may not be such a degree of conflict in the House.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy would seek conflict anyway. Fifteen minutes ago I said I had an open mind on the matter. We will implement the report on receiving it. I have an open mind about how to deal with other issues.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

We must move on. Are there other questions to be raised on the Order of Business? We cannot have a debate on this matter. It does not arise under Standing Orders.

Mr. Higgins (Dublin West)

I am sure the Taoiseach is aware of the huge revulsion at the revelations regarding big business interests and politics and political parties.

An Ceann Comhairle

The matter does not arise on the Order of Business.

Mr. Higgins (Dublin West)

In view of this, is the Taoiseach prepared to make time available for an emergency debate on not just today's revelations? I am surprised Deputy John Bruton——

An Ceann Comhairle

The matter does not arise on the Order of Business.

Mr. Higgins (Dublin West)

The Taoiseach should allow time for a debate on the contributions over ten years from business interests and the financial sector to all political parties and to what extent these contributions influenced Government policies and taxation measures, particularly tax amnesties, over the same period.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have ruled that matter out of order. It does not arise on the Order of Business. The Deputy will have to find another way of pursuing the matter.

Mr. McCormack

Is the Tánaiste aware of her party's decision not to contest the Seanad elections and is she aware that scrutinising voting in that election would be contrary to the constitutional provisions of Article 18?

An Ceann Comhairle

That is completely out of order and does not arise on the Order of Business.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. McCormack

It is completely out of order for the Progressive Democrats to interfere with a secret ballot.

Mr. Yates

The Taoiseach may recall that a year ago on the eve of the Dáil recess he made an impassioned plea, as Leader of the Opposition, that written Dáil questions should be allowed during the period of the Dáil recess. Now that he is in a position to do that perhaps he would clarify if that plea was a matter of political expediency, like others, or was it something he really believed in? What does he propose to do about it?

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

Mr. J. Bruton

It arose at length on the Order of Business last year.

Mr. Yates

This is not only appropriate, there is ample precedent for it. Did the Taoiseach mean what he said at that stage and does he intend to do anything about it?

The Taoiseach

The then Taoiseach and the then Minister for Agriculture will recall that I asked that approximately four months before the term ended. Unfortunately, nothing changed. Perhaps if they ask me again at Christmas I will look into the possibility of doing something about it next year.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Yates

The Taoiseach could do something about it now.

Mr. J. Bruton

The Taoiseach's rate of decision making is very slow. It will take him approximately six months to do anything.

Mr. Spring

I congratulate the Ministers of State on their appointments. I note that two Ministers of State have been appointed to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry — Deputy Noel Davern has special responsibility for livestock breeding and horticulture and Deputy Ned O'Keeffe has special responsibility for food. Who is in charge of the very important greyhound industry?

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry has such an interest in racing and greyhounds that he will hold those responsibilities himself.

Mr. Sargent

When will the first edition of the programme of legislation — which normally occupies time on the Order of Business — be published?

The Taoiseach

We will seek to arrange that it be published in good time before the commencement of the autumn session.

Mr. Deenihan

Will the Taoiseach clarify where the responsibility for rural development now rests? Does it rest with the Departments of the Environment, Tourism and Trade or Agriculture, Food and Forestry? There is a great deal of confusion in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry in relation to this matter.

The Taoiseach

Responsibility for the issues of rural development with which Deputy Deenihan is concerned remains with the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. J. Bruton

When will the Taoiseach issue proposals for the establishment of Oireachtas committees? I am thinking in particular of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, the Joint Services Committee and the Committee of Public Accounts, all of which have ongoing work which must be carried out.

The Taoiseach

We have been discussing this issue over the past few days with the Whips. It would be useful if the Committee on Procedure and Privileges could be established tomorrow. That would allow discussions to take place on the review of the committee system carried out by Professor Michael Laver in relation to its possible reform. The committee could examine that report during September and the remaining committees could then be established.

Mr. J. Bruton

Would the Taoiseach agree that the services of the House are also in need of ongoing supervision and that the Joint Services Committee should be established? The outgoing Committee of Public Accounts has much outstanding work, some of which could be done during the summer recess. Does the Taoiseach agree that that committee should also be established?

The Taoiseach

I have no objection to having those issues looked at. The recess will not be very long. Talking to Members on all sides of the House I have detected that most Deputies will be working. The Committee on Procedure and Privileges could work on the way the House will be ordered for the years ahead based on the considerable work that has been done. That is the main issue. The Whips can discuss the other matters if necessary.

Mr. Noonan

On Question Time the Taoiseach promised that the Government would produce a Green Paper on abortion. Which Minister will have responsibility for this?

The Taoiseach

I said we would deal with that matter in due course. That is our commitment. The Cabinet has not decided to move on this matter but an announcement will be made over the next few weeks.

Mr. J. Bruton

Which Minister will be responsible?

The Taoiseach

The Minister for Health will be responsible. The Cabinet will then discuss the issue. Responsibility for dealing with preparation of the Green Paper in due course may be a different matter.