Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I have done so. This is a simple matter. The Minister should have addressed himself to the reasons the Morris tribunal was established. Why was the Government reluctant to allow an inquiry to be held? Deputies should remember the extensive debate we had in the House on the necessity of establishing an inquiry into the events subsequently inquired into by the Morris tribunal. The issues which caused the House to establish the tribunal were obvious and members of the public had been concerned about them for a long time.

What did the Minister do in his contribution to the recent debate? He did not apologise to the victims or beg the forgiveness of the House for the long delay but instead attacked a Member of the Oireachtas and a former Deputy on the basis that the issue was raised in the tribunal's report. I am surprised that Deputy Byrne, who is a legal practitioner, cited this as a reason for the Minister's intervention. Members of the Judiciary know well that they have no function in ordering how the House should conduct its business because they are specifically and explicitly precluded from in any way interfering with the process of the House. While the Oireachtas is precluded by the Constitution from interfering in the judicial process, over the years, it has become the practice for Members to deviate from this stipulation from time to time by commenting on the courts, often in a less than positive manner. The fact that the Executive has the power to hire and the Oireachtas the power to fire should not be lost on those who wish to make comment.

In recent times, the courts and some members of the Judiciary have seen fit to curtail the activities of the Houses of the Oireachtas and the manner in which we attend to our business. They have no authority in this area and any intrusion should be stoutly resisted in the Houses. The only persons who have control over procedure and privilege in the Houses are the Ceann Comhairle of the Dáil and Cathaoirleach of the Seanad. Any intrusion must be resisted, resented and contested because it is an interference in the rights of Members of Parliament to raise issues as they see fit, a right which has nothing to do with the courts.

While Members have from time to time commented on the Judiciary, as elected public representatives we have a duty to raise public issues without deference to anyone inside or outside the House. If we respond to the queries raised by members of the public, that is our function. I emphasise that under the separation of powers laid down in the Constitution, the courts have no function in telling Members of the Oireachtas what we should do. We are coming to a stage where we may have to have a referendum. I know the Government does not like referendums, based on recent experiences. We may well need to have a referendum to decide who deals with what, and when. The interpretation of the Constitution is entirely a matter for the courts. Far be it from me to attempt to lecture my learned colleagues on the opposite side of the House, but I reserve the right, nonetheless — and I have read a small bit of it as well.

See this speech in context