Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I find it extraordinary and almost unprecedented that the House is being asked to set up a very serious commission of investigation into matters of grave concern in regard to the administration of justice in this country, issues that have led to the resignations of a confidential recipient to a Minister, a Garda Commissioner and a Minister for Justice who, in a letter to the Taoiseach, said he was resigning because he wanted to spare the Government embarrassment in advance of the local and European elections. The Guerin report outlined in considerable detail the senior counsel's assessment of issues that had been raised by whistleblower Maurice McCabe. The Taoiseach asked Mr. Guerin to consider those assertions and allegations, and the outcome of that was a recommendation by Mr. Guerin to establish a commission of inquiry and now we are being told that this House cannot debate, comment on or contribute in any shape or form to the terms of reference or to the establishment of that inquiry. I find it extraordinary.

I am told that the Ceann Comhairle has issued this, and the Taoiseach confirmed that with me last evening. It has been confirmed to us that he invoked Standing Order 57(2) in regard to this issue. I would appreciate it, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, if our side of the House and our party could be given a written statement outlining the rationale for the invocation of this particular Standing Order. Did the Ceann Comhairle receive correspondence from any Member or from any individual asking that this debate would not proceed? I would like that confirmed; I do not know. I have read Standing Order 57(2) and it states that a matter may not be raised where it relates to a case where notice has been served and which is to be heard before a jury or is then being heard before a jury. I am not aware of any case that is being heard before a jury. I believe there is a case via sworn affidavit or a High Court referral as well in terms of juridical review, but I am not aware of any case before a jury so we need an explanation as to the rationale behind the Ceann Comhairle's decision to invoke Standing Order 57(2), which essentially muzzles this House. This is more than just the debate itself. It is about the status of this Parliament. It seems extraordinary that the Parliament is going to proceed with establishing an inquiry into issues of the most fundamental concern about the administration of justice and there will be no debate. It is incredible.

I ask myself the question: how was the banking inquiry established? I am glad it is established but it is my understanding that there are criminal cases due to come in regard to matters pertaining to banking, for example, which perhaps will go before a jury and there was no invocation of Standing Order 57(2), nor would I want it to be invoked because I want that inquiry to proceed, but it appears there is an inconsistency in the application of Standing Order 57(2) in this particular case given other matters.

I accept that the Taoiseach or the Government has not been involved in this and I would be of the view that the Minister would welcome a debate on the establishment of this commission of investigation. We have tabled an amendment, and I know Deputy Wallace and others have tabled an amendment but, extraordinarily, we will not be able to speak to those amendments. It is bizarre and unacceptable.

I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw the motion until next week and until all parties in the House can engage with the Ceann Comhairle's office to determine the basis for the invocation of Standing Order 57(2) and if we can bring about a situation next week where the motion can be put to the House but subject to a proper debate. I accept I only wrote to the Taoiseach prior to our coming into the House. He would not have received the letter formally asking him to withdraw this motion to allow for proper consideration by the House because it goes to the heart of what a Parliament is about.

We must remember that these issues originated in this Parliament, in the Dáil. They were debated at great length by various Deputies from different strands of opinion on these issues for 12 to 18 months. The culmination of all of that is the establishment of the inquiry and it seems incredible that the Dáil will not have an opportunity to debate the terms of reference of that inquiry, the reasons behind the establishment of the inquiry and what people would like to see emerge from it.

See this speech in context