The revelations made known by the Taoiseach to the House yesterday in respect of Mr. Justice Flood's resignation have added greater confusion to the issue, and give the impression that the Taoiseach has misled the House. The Attorney General knew of and attended a meeting on 26 May with two other judges in relation to the costs issue on the pending resignation of Mr. Justice Flood. Did the Attorney General inform the Taoiseach of this meeting and, if so, did that not mean that the Government was then in possession of the information that Mr. Justice Flood intended to resign? Why did the Taoiseach give the impression last week, in answer to a number of parties in the House, that he had only just become aware of this information, and that in his breathless rush to impart that information he did not have time to deal with the legal intricacies of what was contained therein? Does this not mean that the information in regard to Mr. Justice Flood saying he wished and intended to retire as chairman of the tribunal was made known to the Taoiseach and the Government through the Attorney General on 26 May, and by formal letter on 28 May, and that the Taoiseach had this information for a month, and that this House and its Members were not so informed by the Government? Does that not constitute a misleading of the House and the withholding of relevant information about the most historic tribunal of recent times?
Can the Taoiseach account for the fact that the Attorney General does not appear to have brought this information to his attention, or, if he did so, that the Taoiseach did not make the House aware of it? Why did the Taoiseach give the impression last Tuesday that he had not become aware of this information until the Cabinet meeting earlier that morning? Does it not mean that the Taoiseach's handling of this issue has been confused, and that he has misled Dáil Éireann?