Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

In the light of the Minister's opening address and having regard to the fact that he has had the opportunity to hear most of the debate and commentary during the day, is he prepared to revise his earlier assessment? In view of the fact that he has engaged in the most blatant act of party political partisanship of the most narrow kind and the most base type this House has seen for many years, will he not accept that in doing so, he has undermined and belittled the role of Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform under the Constitution?

I do not believe his comments today on this issue can be equalled in terms of the damage he has done to the office. He might look, in particular, at what his penultimate predecessor, former Deputy Michael McDowell, has done in the context of these reports, a man who was justifiably criticised by Deputies on this side of the House, and indeed by some on the Government side, for many of his actions as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform at times, for his hasty reactions and statements. However, nothing any Minister has said can equal what this Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has done today in terms of the blatant attack on a Member of the House who is present and more than capable of defending his interest and also on former Deputy Jim Higgins, who is not even in the country to defend his good name following what was a most vicious political smear from a man whose trademark and stock in trade appears to be narrow partisan political point scoring on every possible occasion.

What type of investigation does the Minister believe the Deputies might have engaged in, having regard to the fact that he probably has an advantage of understanding that Mr. Justice Morris does not have, in the context of his position as a Member of the House of many years standing, engaged in the parliamentary role, function and duties of a public representative, particularly at constituency level? If he reflects on the many representations he has received over the years, surely the Minister realises the position. Has he become so far removed from reality, in the ivory tower of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and before that the Department of Foreign Affairs — where he may have seen a greater level of detachment from other Departments — that he does not realise Deputies do not have the type of resources envisaged by Mr. Justice Morris when he stated they should have conducted an investigation, a review, meetings etc.? This was a reference which, in a deceitful manner, was twisted by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in his selective quotation of Mr. Justice Morris.

If, as they did, the Deputies came into possession of some information, what better course of action could they have taken than to report the matter privately and in confidence to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, rather than speaking publicly in the House under the cloak of absolute privilege? Perhaps, on reflection, the Minister might consider revising his view. I ask that Deputies deal with this fundamental issue in the first instance before embarking on other questions, having regard to the very serious and deliberate slur on Members of the House that were cast in a most deliberate way by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. This was not just in passing; it was the main body of his contribution. As Deputies said, it took up more time in the debate than comment on the 680 days of sittings and the 840 or so witnesses. The Minister chose the narrow political route and, as such, has damaged considerably the Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

See this speech in context