Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)

A valid question was asked and I wish to ask it again because it should be answered more clearly. Would we ever have found out about these payments or would the loans, as the Taoiseach describes them, have been repaid if The Irish Times had not found out? On 18 February 1999 — six years almost to the day from when Senator Lydon got me in a headlock, which I remember very well — I asked the Taoiseach a question in the Dáil. It was: "Has the Taoiseach been the beneficiary of any payment, contribution or gift from any source which, with the benefit of hindsight, he now considers to be unorthodox, unusual or irregular?" It was a straightforward question and the Taoiseach's reply — at least it was the nearest thing I can say to what was the reply — was: "The Fianna Fáil/ Progressive Democrats Government is clean of all these issues which have been thrown at us this week." Can we have more clarity on that reply, given that it is somewhat wide of the mark? Does the fact that the Taoiseach found that question unworthy of a clearer reply indicate that there were any other payments, including payments to support St. Luke's?

The Taoiseach says St. Luke's is political but there is a material benefit. If I had a constituency office owned by the Green Party, I would not have to pay the rent. It is important that we understand whether funding has gone to the Taoiseach directly or to St. Luke's. Was that unorthodox, unusual or irregular, or does the Taoiseach see it as perfectly normal?

See this speech in context