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

Question 5: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received a communication from the Standards in Public Office Commission in regard to a complaint made against the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment in regard to a request he made to a civil servant to address a meeting of a political party; the action he intends to take arising from the communication received from the SIPO; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20878/06]

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

Question 6: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received contact from the Standards in Public Office Commission in respect of a complaint made against the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21647/06]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Taoiseach the communications he has received from the Standards in Public Office Commission regarding a complaint concerning the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22690/06]

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

Question 8: To ask the Taoiseach if he has received communications from the Standards in Public Office Commission regarding a complaint made against the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22905/06]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 8, inclusive, together.

On 19 May 2006, the chairman of the Standards in Public Office Commission wrote to inform me of the decision of the commission on this matter. The commission concluded that the complaint did not warrant the commencement of an investigation under the ethics Acts. The commission, however, was of the view that it was not appropriate for an office holder to request the attendance of a civil servant at a parliamentary party meeting, even though it accepted the importance of briefings on technical issues being available to legislators who are considering complex proposals. To avoid any perception of partiality by a civil servant, the commission has recommended that in future where meetings are arranged to allow officials to give detailed technical briefings, the facility should be provided on an all-party basis. I accept the thrust of the recommendation of the standards commission and my Department is considering the most appropriate arrangement to meet its concerns.

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

This briefing, in which the Minister instructed a civil servant to brief the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, concerned the groceries order. Members of the parliamentary party must be confused as to how prices have risen so greatly subsequently, but that is a different issue. What action did the Taoiseach take as a result of receiving the communication from the Standards in Public Office Commission that it was inappropriate for a Minister to use a civil servant in this fashion?

Although Fianna Fáil tends to identify itself with the nation, does the Taoiseach now accept that it is wrong to use a public official as though he or she were a political servant of the Minister? Is the Taoiseach satisfied with the level of compliance on the part of his Ministers and Ministers of State in respect of the code of conduct for office holders? In particular, is he satisfied with the compliance in terms of declarations on the register of interests by Ministers and Ministers of State?

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

On the second issue, everyone has an obligation to fill in their forms. People are now familiar with them and are aware of their duties in this regard. In so far as they have filled in the forms, I am satisfied.

On the first question, as I said, I accept the point made by the Standards in Public Office Commission. While the commission concluded that the complaint did not warrant commencement of an investigation, it gave its view on this matter. Obviously, we will try to work out how it can be implemented. While a number of points are involved, I have brought it to the attention of the Cabinet, Ministers of State and the Government secretariat. We must try to work out what the commission's views mean in effect.

According to everyone who has examined this matter, the commission's recommendation states that a civil servant should not be engaged in such briefing to avoid showing partiality to one side rather than the other. While all Members understand this, it has ramifications, because for as long as I have been around, and indeed since the 1924 Act, officials have given briefings on technical or complex issues to Ministers, Ministers of State, or, as they were known, Parliamentary Secretaries, and backbenchers. They have rarely done so at parliamentary party meetings — parliamentary party committees are effectively the same. Officials also have provided briefings to Opposition spokespersons and to those Members of the Oireachtas who have contacted them. Hence, one instance cannot be taken in isolation.

From my experience and from that of those who have been around longer, this is a beneficial and useful way for Members of the Oireachtas to deal with technical and complex issues. Such officials may have been studying a particular issue for years and would be able to explain it.

This matter cannot be dealt with in a strict political sense, and, as Deputy Rabbitte has put it, Fianna Fáil does not try to politicise it. As the Deputy is aware, this is not the case as such briefings are to try to explain an issue. Hence, this must be examined. In the view of everyone who has read the recommendation, it means civil servants can only engage in a briefing with Members of the Oireachtas on an all-party basis. If that is the case, we must consider how that can be arranged, as well as the degree of formality which is thereby introduced into a system that has worked informally for decades. That is not a good thing and brings a level of formality where it is not necessary. It must be structured accordingly. An official attending a parliamentary party or committee meeting with a Minister, giving information by telephone or meeting a Member of the Opposition or a backbencher is exactly the same.

As always, I will accept the judgment of the Standards in Public Office Commission. However, we must engage to see how we can make such a ruling work in effect. Ultimately, we would have to amend the code of conduct for office holders. We must find a way that makes this work meaningful and helpful rather than something that works against the system. I am honoured to have served on both sides of this House and held many positions, including Government backbencher, Opposition backbencher, Minister of State, Minister and Taoiseach. To implement this as written will not be good for the Oireachtas in the future.

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

Has the Taoiseach sought clarification or has he communicated these views to the Standards in Public Office Commission? He seems to indicate a level of dissent from the decision it made. Does he intend to involve colleagues on this side of the House in drawing up any views that he might put to it? Surely, he is not putting on the basis of equivalence civil servants briefing Ministers or Ministers of State on technical matters or on any matter with them briefing on a politically partisan basis.

I note the Taoiseach stated civil servants brief Members on this side of the House. Speaking for myself, it does not happen very much. Some Ministers invite a spokesperson from this side of the House to be briefed on a Bill. Some Ministers do not as they are concerned about an outbreak of knowledge on this side of the House. I do not see how there can be equivalence between that and briefing a parliamentary party meeting as the civil servant in this case was instructed to do. It was an instruction to a civil servant to address a parliamentary meeting that recently lead to the resignation of an official working for a previous Minister of State. I would have thought one strong point of the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, is his ability to communicate. I do not rate very highly his ability to read documents or to get into the detail, but he is good at briefing. I do not know why a civil servant would have to be sent in on a case like this.

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

The Deputy must ask a question.

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

Notwithstanding the Taoiseach's commitment to the House regarding Ministers promoting themselves under the guise of promulgating a Government policy, did I recently read about the Minister of State with special responsibility for children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, telling parents——

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

It does not arise out of this question.

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

Does it not?

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

No, definitely not.

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

How is that? I thought it was the same issue.

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

The Deputy's question refers to a complaint made against the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment.

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

I am trying to understand the implications of it for our system.

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

The Deputy must confine himself to the questions before us.

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

I will. I absolutely accept that. Is the Taoiseach aware that the Minister of State with special responsibility for children briefed parents about the bonanza they will receive in child care?

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

It does not arise out of this question. The Chair has ruled on the matter.

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

The Taoiseach indicated he was satisfied with the compliance with the code of conduct for officeholders. Will he state, in respect of recent publicity attaching to a Minister of State in this regard, whether he has checked it and is satisfied there is no basis for the imputation therein?

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

I remind Members that the Standards in Public Office Commission is the statutory body to deal with any specific cases of complaints made under the ethics code.

Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is making the statements. It is only about what he is saying and nothing more.

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

I am replying to a question. As I said in my reply, I accept the thrust of the recommendation of the Standards in Public Office Commission and my Department is considering the most appropriate arrangements to meet the commission's concern. The Government will make the point I have expressed to obtain clarification. If we can resolve the matter at that level, then we can do so. If obtaining clarification requires reference to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, we can obtain it in this way, but I hope that would be avoidable.

My point is about the merit of changing from a system that works very well at present to a more formal one that I do not believe is necessary. If the view is that it is necessary, so be it. I checked on a given week and noted that at least nine Ministers, or either backbenchers or Opposition Members, would have had a direct reference to a civil servant for bona fide reasons. These would have included obtaining clarification, understanding or a briefing from somebody dedicated to a specific area. I do not see what is wrong with this. It has gone on from time immemorial and I do not understand the reason for changing it.

The presence of a civil servant at a parliamentary party meeting would be very rare. I can understand that point but I remember many occasions on which a civil servant attended a meeting of a parliamentary party committee. There is no real difference between a parliamentary party and a parliamentary party committee. If one were to say addressing such a body should not be possible unless it is on an all-party basis, one would, by extension, have to include anyone, be he or she a backbencher, front bench spokesperson, member of the Opposition or otherwise. I am not referring to the current Opposition but talking about what has been happening here for years. I do not believe this is necessary because the current system functions very well. On many occasions while in Opposition, I was able to benefit from a civil servant giving an explanation.

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

Maybe the Taoiseach had closer contact with them than the rest of us.

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

No. People are doing it this very week. I am trying to make a point concerning the future more than the present. We should not close ourselves to systems that operate very well because somebody has a certain view. I accept the view but I would argue it. If limitations had be placed on the existing system, I would accept a provision concerning a parliamentary party. However, if later today, for totally proper reasons, Deputy Rabbitte wanted to be briefed on a Bill by a civil servant who may be the expert on the relevant legislation for the past ten or 15 years, or if he needed to obtain clarification on some point for 15 minutes on which someone may have written to him, there would be nothing wrong with his doing so. There is no sense in the idea that we should have an all-party group comprising members from my side and the other side. The idea involves a misunderstanding of how this House works.

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

Is the Taoiseach reading the letter correctly?

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

I have given the letter to all the wizards who normally read these and we will get an interpretation. I accept the view expressed because I do not want to take issue with it but I do not want to close down the right of Members of this House who are not officeholders to something that has existed since the implementation of the 1924 Act. I do not regard it as necessary to change the system. On too many occasions, our rights and involvement in processes that are very useful to us are closed down. That is unnecessary. I make that point, but if people convince me otherwise, I will amend the rules. In this case my view is that it is not a good judgment, but I will explore it further.

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

That has been a very interesting exchange of views. Many years ago, when the then Minister of State, John Donnellan, was here dealing with social welfare and other complex issues about assessments on farms in particular, he admitted he was unable to answer all the questions but would make the person in the Department who could answer the question available for all the parties. His point was that he would make the public servant available to anybody who wanted to ask a question. Now it could be done either by technology, the Internet or whatever.

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

I do not have a difficulty with that. It is fair that the information should be available to everybody but it should not be done in a collective sense if everybody does not want it. If an Opposition Front Bench spokesperson is dealing with some Act in opposition — we have all been in that position — and wants to have something clarified, there is no need for a formalised committee of the House to do that. It should be available if somebody else wants it, but the chances of someone else wanting that briefing is highly unlikely. My point is that we should not formalise matters that are not necessary.

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

Information from the Government has a peculiar way of coming out anyway. I notice in a range of provincial papers that particular Government Deputies appear to be very much aware of where lotto grants come from and to what they are being allocated. They appear to have that information before anybody else. I am not sure whether it is leaked from the Department or whatever.

Damien English (Meath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The phones are busy.

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

Perhaps it is because some members of the Government feel they have acquired a station above their——

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

A question, please, Deputy.

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

——remit and l'etat c'est moi might apply. Is the Taoiseach happy that no other members of the Government are out on a limb about any of this? I know he wants to keep people in check and I am sure he reminds them on a regular basis that they should neither be exposed nor caught in a position where they abuse political responsibility and trust in terms of a Ministry or a Ministry of State. Is he happy that they all clearly understand his message?

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

There are guidelines, codes of conduct and the ethics Acts, and the Standards in Public Office Commission has laid down what people should do. I do all I can to bring to their attention what is contained in the Acts and guidelines and refer to it every year when they have to fill up their form. I hope people comply with that. The Cabinet secretariat brings home to people the rules and guidelines by which people should abide. A sufficient number of events have happened in recent years for people to understand that and I do my utmost to ensure that. I cannot always be sure that every facet is complete but I hope they do that and I strongly emphasise it to them. It is a separate point to the one I am arguing. On the other one, we need clarification to hold on to systems that are beneficial to us, but as far as the ethics Acts and the Standards in Public Office Commission codes of practice are concerned, I continually highlight to them that they should stay 100% within those guidelines.

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

The Minister, Deputy Martin, was admonished by the Standards in Public Office Commission. The Taoiseach said originally that there was nothing wrong and, likewise, in regard to the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, and the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey——

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

Deputy, I am going to conclude this question. If you have a brief question I will hear it but if you have not——

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

Given that the Taoiseach did not think there was anything wrong, has he asked for a briefing to be given in this way, which he has had to reconsider in light of the view of the Standards in Public Office Commission? Has he had to change his view of what is acceptable given the commission's view?

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

Several times in opposition I got briefings directly from civil servants.

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

Has the Taoiseach asked for this?

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

I asked several times, both when leading the Opposition and as Opposition spokesperson. If one was to follow this rule one could not talk to any public servant unless everybody else was there. That does not make good parliamentary sense. If the Deputy listens to the point I am making——

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

The commission is wrong.

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

I said I accept the thrust of the commission's decision, but I would debate with it how it can be implemented so as not to restrict Members' rights. I shall make that point, and if I cannot convince it of that, we will have to go ahead. It is a misunderstanding of how a system works.

Deputy Kenny's point is correct that if one gets a briefing one should accept it is available to everybody. However, it cannot be formalised in such a manner that if someone wants a briefing everybody else must be present at the same time, and that is how it is being read by everybody. We shall try to resolve that. I do not believe it will be a major issue to resolve. I accept the thrust of the recommendation. I want to see it implemented in a way that does not remove a useful facility which allows this House to work effectively.