Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to raise a matter that is not a party political one but which might be of some assistance to the Taoiseach and the Government. Last week I met a number of emigrant groups and the lobby for immigration reform in the United States. The Taoiseach will be aware of the plight of, and difficulties faced by, undocumented Irish people in the United States of America. During that meeting, the case of a young person who has been in the United States for a number of years was brought to my attention. Her brother died in Ireland, she was unable to return home and listened to the funeral mass over a telephone line. The problem is that many people find themselves in a very difficult position, being unable to return home for family occasions and so forth. The point must be made clearly, however, that such people are not looking for something for nothing. They want an opportunity and a rational method of earning citizenship in the United States, if that is where they want to live.

I raise the matter in a constructive sense today because the immigration Bills that have emerged from the US Senate and the House of Representatives are at variance with each other. In such cases, a conference is called between nominated members of the Senate and the House of Representatives to discuss the Bills. The conference to discuss the immigration Bills begins on 28 June. It may be brief or it may go on for some weeks.

I know that the Minister for Foreign Affairs was in the United States recently but it would be helpful if the Government, perhaps through the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, sent representatives of all parties, and none, in an all-island delegation. The SDLP could be included, if necessary, or any other party. Such a delegation could have a focused lobbying and information conversation with the nominated members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. This would be helpful in demonstrating that the undocumented Irish are of no danger to the US economy or its security. An all-island presentation to the nominated members would be very helpful and I offer that as a constructive suggestion to augment the work currently being done.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the question and the spirit in which it is put. An enormous effort has been made in the past 18 months on this issue, although that is not to take from those groups which have been involved for a much longer period. Last year we raised the issue with the President, Mr. Bush, and we did so again this year. We also worked with the lobby group over the past six to nine months.

The situation is quite fluid at the moment. The two Bills are quite different and there has been a great deal of discussion and lobbying about how they can be brought together. Effort is needed to get the decision made quickly. When I was in the United States two weeks ago, the view of the consul general and others in the lobby group was that we should try to secure a decision prior to the summer otherwise it will be put off into the autumn and the mid-term elections, which could force the legislation into next year. Our best chance is to secure a decision now. There has been some success with this recently. President Bush's statements on the last occasion when it was being voted on proved helpful.

I have no difficulty with the all-party group. It is helpful; anything that makes our case is welcome. There are, however, many difficulties. It has become increasingly relevant in the past 18 months to people on the hill. The Irish lobby group conducted a very successful campaign earlier this year and put its case in a professional way. Key people such as Senators Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Ted Kennedy have all been very helpful and constructive.

It is still unclear what will happen on 28 June. The Minister for Foreign Affairs was in touch with the ambassador about this issue and pushed the case when he was in the United States two weeks ago as well. Any effort we can make to keep the Irish case on the table is of great help. We should keep in touch with the authorities during the process.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Taoiseach for his response on an all-party representative group being able to lobby nominated members of Congress. Serious politics are being played about this matter in the United States. President Bush's statement is welcome — on one hand he supports increased security but on the other hand he supports the right to earn citizenship.

While an all-party delegation from here might not have any impact on the eventual direction of the Bill, a different view from the House of Representatives is epitomised when speaking to American Congressmen on homeland security and immigration. They have a very different view in some cases than when one says "we are talking here about Irish undocumented". In that sense it would be helpful that representatives from this House could make their case directly to those nominated.

In the event that the conference fails and it cannot agree on a compromise or way forward, and given that during the November mid-term elections, it will be an issue for both Republican and Democrat politicians could we put in place an arrangement to discuss a bilateral agreement between the US authorities and Ireland?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The best way to make progress is to make an effort before the summer. Taking the Bill that has been passed by the Senate and the Sensenbrenner Bill, we must try to find a compatible Bill which brings the two together, which is not easy because of their differing bases and the heated arguments over the topic. The Minister for Foreign Affairs was told that as the politics play out in this, we need to work closely with those watching the day to day activity, the embassy staff, Niall O'Dowd and Grant Lally, to see the best way to make our input.

We have made progress since the beginning of the year through our own lobby group because of the responsible way we have fought our case. To take the Sensenbrenner Bill and the Senate Bill and to put them together in one Bill in a short period could be difficult. Perhaps the meeting on 28 June could drag out. The difficulty is that it is not just an election year but there are differences in many places. Last week in California, it was the central issue in a victory for Republicans who took an aggressively negative stance.

We must keep in touch with everyone but try to use the Senate Bill as the basis because it suits us and would offer a road to permanent residency for Irish people like no other proposal. We can decide how best to put forward a delegation through our committee.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach take this opportunity to clarify for thousands of people in the employ of the public sector where they stand in the decentralisation project? Thousands of people do not know if they are coming or going or when they will go if it is proposed to persist with this plan.

The agencies, numbering at least 2,500 people, have been removed from it, and of the 1,700 specialist staff in the Civil Service, 20% say they are willing to go under certain circumstances. If we add those two figures together, they amount to more than 4,000 of the original 10,300. Why is the Government determined to persist with a programme that from day one was badly thought out, ill-judged and purely for political window dressing at the time? This is not decentralisation, it is dispersal of civil servants and it is damaging to the efficiency of Government and undermines the national spatial strategy.

The extra costs involved will only be calculated in the years ahead. It will be necessary to employ a parallel Civil Service. If 20% of specialist staff say they are prepared to go in certain circumstances, the same will happen as has happened in the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, which is recruiting new specialist personnel. The implications of losing those specialist skills are unthinkable for governance.

Has the time not come to state clearly Government policy in this area? People have put down roots in Dublin, their families are in education and their spouses are working. This is not working and the Taoiseach knows it. If the agencies have been removed from the plan and the specialist staff will not go, is it not time to go back to the drawing board for a complete review of the idea?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government continues, through the decentralisation implementation group, to work through the proposals with staff. More than 10,600 civil and public servants have applied to the central application facility to relocate and it receives new applications every week.

To answer Deputy Rabbitte's question on the current situation, several Departments have been prioritised and are working their way through the system. Regarding property, building acquisition negotiations have been completed in 13 priority locations for individual agencies or sections. Contracts have been received for another ten locations for further down the line. Suitable sites have been identified in a further 15 locations through negotiation. All have identifiable sections or Departments moving to them. Agreement has been reached with the staff side on several human resource and industrial relations issues, thus enabling progress on transfers and staff promotions. Discussions in other areas are ongoing.

As I said a few weeks ago, it obviously cannot be done this side of Christmas, as would have happened under the original programme. In the priority areas, approximately 2,500 civil servants have been identified. Most agencies and sections have agreed and, in those areas, there is no difficulty. In certain professional areas, people have stated their position and discussions are ongoing. IMPACT has put forward a negotiated paper from the staff side. The movement of staff within and between Departments is under way, and approximately 1,500 staff have already been assigned to posts to be decentralised. All Departments have produced implementation plans setting out the detailed arrangements being put in place to plan for relocation.

The plan is moving ahead at a slower pace, and we require innovative solutions to deal with certain issues. In the State agencies, the programme has not been abandoned. Some are anxious to move but desire flexibility regarding what has been set down hitherto. That must happen, and the industrial relations section of FÁS has produced its own resolutions. Other State agencies will have to do likewise. There is a hard core of civil servants now preparing to move, and those plans are going ahead.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is confusing what is happening, presumably deliberately. We are talking about transferring entire Departments, and there is no point in confusing that with the fact that there have been applications from civil servants already outside Dublin to return to their town or village of origin. That is a different matter, and it ought to be facilitated in the Civil Service.

The Taoiseach is proposing to transfer Departments out of the capital lock, stock and barrel, contrary to the entire literature on the issue. Most people who have read and studied the issue have made clear that removing the brain of the Civil Service from ready access to Ministers will damage the coherence of Government. Anyone who knows anything about the matter will agree that one needs access to the key people.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's time is concluded.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Confusing that with people transferring between Donegal and Kerry or Offaly and Galway is neither here nor there.

Since the only time that the Government will contemplate establishing an all-party committee is when it is deeply in trouble and wishes to share blame and responsibility, is this not an issue on which there should be an all-party review dealing with implementation from the very beginning? It is desirable to relocate people out of Dublin where feasible to address regional imbalance. It is also desirable to transfer young civil servants who wish to return to their county of origin, but that cannot be done the McCreevy way.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy's time is concluded.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach has now admitted that. The former Deputy, Mr. McCreevy, said that it would be a catastrophe for the Government if it had not implemented the programme by Christmas. The Taoiseach will have none of it implemented by that stage and is chalking up great additional costs for the taxpayer. He is purchasing property for which there may be no occupier and he is not clearing the buildings for sale in Dublin that he imagined.

The whole thing is a mess and an all-party review, given the central importance of the issues, would be a way forward. It could then be done on a workable basis that had been negotiated and planned, in keeping with some kind of spatial strategy and with regard to the real problems that the Taoiseach is now creating for civil and public servants.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I ask the Deputy to give way to the Taoiseach.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have stated in the House in recent weeks that we cannot implement the programme within the timescale first envisaged but that there are priority areas where advance negotiations with the staff side have been undertaken to move specific sections or units of Departments. That is the clear position, and those plans are moving ahead. They cover approximately 2,500 civil servants from those listed, and that is substantial.

The agencies are different, and I will not complicate matters because they must be handled differently. FÁS reached a resolution last week. We opened the Marine Institute in Galway, which has brought all its professional staff, bar a handful — I believe 20 out of 180. Those highly qualified professionals are successfully being moved from several Dublin locations to Galway, and that can also happen in other agencies. Others will be slower, and I accept Deputy Rabbitte's point that removing a hard core of departmental policy units would create difficulties, especially during parliamentary sessions.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is doing just that in eight Departments.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Please allow the Taoiseach to speak.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

However, the Deputy is talking about a small hard core, and all Members who have been in Government, including the Deputy, know that policy units are small. That issue is being discussed in the implementation group and it has been put forward by senior civil servants, especially from the higher grades. Their case must be listened to because the process is voluntary and the Government has stated throughout that we will consider such arguments. IMPACT and other Civil Service unions, including the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants, have advanced their views.

On the other side, there are far more people from a large number of sections, including large portions of, if not all, Departments, who want to move. The restructuring of levels the Deputy mentioned is proceeding without any great disruption to Departments or units in the Civil Service. We are not trying to move 10,000 people over the next two years. We are dealing instead with perhaps 2,500 — a much more manageable number. That is what the implementation group is doing, and I believe it will succeed.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last Wednesday, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, told me that he knew that no prisoners have gone, or will go, through Shannon on the way to Guantanamo Bay or any other torture chambers throughout the world. Since then, we have heard of three suicides at Guantanamo, and the Taoiseach may have heard President Bush's Administration responding. Rear Admiral Harry Harris said that the suicides were an act of "asymmetrical warfare" against the US. He may also have heard the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Ms Colleen Graffy, describe the three suicides as a good public relations move. Today, it was found that a prisoner had secretly been on board a US-hired civilian aeroplane. He had been handcuffed and manacled, supposedly for a minor transgression. The US authorities said that there had been an administrative error.

Given the Government's position regarding such activities, if the prisoner had been found to be en route to a torture camp in breach of international law, it would be guilty of collusion and complicit through having accepted mere diplomatic assurances. That much is clear when one reads the law.

According to Article 4 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which was signed on 10 December 1984 in New York:

Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.

According to Article 16 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, which was signed on 7 December 1944 in Chicago:

The appropriate authorities of each of the contracting States shall have the right, without unreasonable delay, to search aircraft of the other contracting States on landing or departure, and to inspect the certificates and other documents prescribed by this Convention.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Sargent's time has concluded.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have read out international law in respect of this issue which applies to all countries. Can the Taoiseach quote legislation to support his refusal to search these planes?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Sargent's time has concluded.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where is this legislation? I do not believe it exists.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with Deputy Sargent's comments about the deaths of three inmates at Guantanamo Bay. The full circumstances surrounding the deaths remain unclear but the fact that three detainees committed suicide is deeply troubling. I welcome the promise by the US Government to hold a full review of procedures used at the camp. It has been agreed that the International Committee of the Red Cross may shortly undertake another visit to the camp.

In respect of the legal basis on which persons at Guantanamo Bay are being detained, the Government's position on the condition and status of detainees is clear and has been consistently conveyed to the US authorities. We believe that all detained persons are entitled to the protection of international human rights instruments and, where applicable, international humanitarian law. I understand the Irish Government was the first government to call for the closure of Guantanamo Bay and did so long before other EU governments. I share the view expressed by many people, including the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, that those held at Guantanamo Bay should either be charged or released and that the US should close the facilities. We have expressed this view on highly desirable humanitarian grounds. I agree with Deputy Sargent's comments.

As the Minister for Foreign Affairs stated, a civilian aircraft carrying US military personnel landed at Shannon Airport for a technical refuelling stop on route from Kuwait to the US. It emerged on Monday that US authorities had inadvertently failed to seek the consent for this. Such transfers of prisoners are permitted under international domestic law, however consent was not sought. The Minister for Foreign Affairs raised this with the US ambassador last night and undertook to examine our procedures to ensure that these events do not re-occur.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I take it the Taoiseach has no jurisdiction over Guantanamo Bay but he does have jurisdiction over Shannon Airport. This is the substance of my question. Does the Taoiseach accept Senator Dick Marty's clear understanding that flights used for rendition purposes have used Shannon Airport? Ireland was effectively found guilty of negligent collusion with the secret detention and unlawful interstate transfers of persons by the US military and the Central Intelligence Agency by the Council of Europe's committee on legal affairs and human rights. The Taoiseach has been asked by the Council of Europe, the EU Network of Independent Experts in Fundamental Rights, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the Irish Human Rights Commission, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and 76% of the Irish people at the last count to live up to his international human rights commitments and obligations and ensure these airplanes are inspected. Will the Taoiseach do so in compliance with international law, irrespective of who owns or hired the airplanes or what might be found on them? He is legally obliged to uphold the law. Will he do so and does he accept that flights used for rendition purposes have passed through Shannon Airport?

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not accept that at all.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is out of sync with everyone else.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are absolutely opposed to extraordinary rendition. We have made this emphatically clear on a continuous basis, including directly and at the highest level, to the US. US authorities have fully accepted our position and have made it clear that prisoners have not been transferred through Irish territory nor would they be——

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not the question. The Taoiseach is not answering the question.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach should answer the question.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputies listen to me?

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach, without interruption. Members will be asked to leave the House if they continue to interrupt.

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is not answering the question.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I remind Deputy Gormley that the question has been asked by Deputy Sargent. The Chair will not tolerate a situation where other Members interject on Leaders' Questions.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I answered Deputy Sargent's question about whether I agreed with Senator Marty. The gardaí have the powers to search these aircraft if there is any reasonable suspicion they are breaking the law.

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is reasonable suspicion.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is Deputy Sargent also a garda?

Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, I am not. I am simply quoting Amnesty International.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

These aircraft are chartered civilian airplanes.

Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are not state aircraft.

Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We disagree with the substance of Senator Marty's references about this country. There is no question of Ireland having been involved in any collusion. Senator Marty's use of the term is unfortunate. Ireland has not colluded in any unlawful activity. The connections with the refuelling referred to in Senator Marty's report were made after the fact on the basis of the imposition of a pattern of movement so there is no significant evidence in the report. As I stated last week, if he has a basis for his assertions, he should produce it.

Before preparing his report, Senator Marty, amazingly and unlike any other body, did not contact anyone in Government circles to check anything.