Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)

Three years ago, I received serious allegations regarding a State agency and enormous sums of money. After raising the matter in general terms, I was invited by the then Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, former Deputy Michael McDowell, to bring to him any information I possessed. Mr. McDowell was reviled by many but in that instance the invitation he extended to me was reasonable and I acted properly by passing on the information I possessed and agreeing to co-operate with the subsequent Garda inquiry. That was the proper course of action.

The question that arises in the aftermath of the present Minister's performance is whether I would feel comfortable approaching him in a similar situation. He heavily castigated my colleagues for taking what appears to have been a sensible course of action. He seemed to imply that by handing over this information, Deputy Howlin and Mr. Higgins cost the taxpayer €50 million and they were the reason the inquiry lasted six years. Prior to this information coming to light, ample evidence had been submitted to support the need for an inquiry. Is the Minister saying the inquiry was a waste of time and money? Does he not accept that, with the full co-operation of this House, new legislation was introduced and new bodies established, including the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission and the Garda Inspectorate? These ensued from the revelations that emerged in the course of the tribunal and the recommendations made by Mr. Justice Morris.

What emerged from the inquiries of the tribunal can only be described as the greatest series of scandals involving members of the Garda Síochána since the foundation of the State. Was it not important to expose and deal with these scandals? The 99.5% of the Garda who are fine and upstanding members were happy that the few who let down the force in such a serious manner were exposed. The cancer was treated and new processes were put in place to ensure, as far as possible, that such events would never recur.

It is unfortunate that the Minister's approach to these issues has led to a singular focus on Deputy Howlin and Mr. Higgins. In respect of the arms trial, Liam Cosgrave went to the then Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, when information came into his possession. Clearly that was the right thing for him to do. Deputy Howlin and Mr. Higgins were the Opposition spokespersons on justice. Information came into their possession, the veracity of which they could not know. In one instance in particular, the information appeared to come from a highly reputable source. They did not have the resources to investigate the allegations and would have had some cheek if they had attempted to do so. The proper approach was to bring the allegations to the attention of the Minister and leave them with him. The role of the Minister was to ensure a proper investigation.

In regard to the serious allegations I received three years ago, at the invitation of the then Minister I handed to him the information with which I had been furnished. As responsible Members of this House, we attempted to do the right thing at the right time. Members may in future receive legitimate and credible complaints. What will they do? Certainly, the Minister owes the House an explanation, if only from the point of view of what he says to Members who receive serious allegations. Does he say that his door is shut and that this is not a matter for him? He should clear up this matter and then we can focus on the serious, outstanding recommendations of the Morris report and on the need for Members to examine Article 15.10 of the Constitution. Perhaps this is a matter dealt with in the Supreme Court that should be referred to the all-party committee on the Constitution with a view to a recommendation for clarification and change.

See this speech in context