Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is a week since the departure of the former Garda Commissioner, Mr. Martin Callinan, following a visit to his home by the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality in which he conveyed the Taoiseach's view that the issue of telephone recordings was very serious. The following morning the Commissioner resigned, retired or was, as is my view, forced out of office. Last Wednesday in the Dáil, the Minister for Justice and Equality stated he "was not briefed on the matter until approximately 6 p.m. on Monday, 24 March 2014 in the Department of Justice and Equality" and "was first furnished with the letter of 10 March from the Garda Commissioner yesterday at approximately 12.40 p.m." He confirmed that, following the briefing on Monday, 24 March, with officials in the Department "on this matter" - whatever "this matter" means, whether the letter or the entire issue - he met the Taoiseach and Attorney General to further discuss the matter. I understand they were joined at that Monday evening meeting by the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality. I ask the Taoiseach to confirm if that is the case.

Reading the Minister's statements - I stand to be corrected in this regard - he does not state anywhere that he was not aware of the content of the letter. I would like this matter clarified. Was the Minister made aware at any stage, either before he left for Mexico or at any time before 12.40 p.m. on Tuesday, 25 March, of the content of the letter from the Garda Commissioner? It seems inconceivable that, in a meeting with departmental officials on Monday, 24 March, at which the Minister was briefed about this matter, the Secretary General or another official would not have raised with the Minister the fact that the Garda Commissioner had sent a letter two weeks earlier. Was the Minister aware of, or was he alerted on the evening of 24 March, as to the content of the letter? When he joined the Taoiseach, was the Taoiseach made aware of the fact that the Garda Commissioner had written a letter? Was the Taoiseach made aware of the content of the letter given that it was surely relevant to the discussion?

I ask the Taoiseach to answer these basic questions. Did the Secretary General join the Taoiseach, Attorney General and Minister for Justice and Equality on the Monday evening? Was the Minister made aware of the content of the letter from the Garda Commissioner at his departmental briefing on Monday, 24 March? Was the Taoiseach made aware of the letter at the subsequent meeting he attended with the other individuals in question?

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

I am assured by the Minister for Justice that he was not so briefed. I can confirm to the Deputy that on the Monday evening I was joined by the Attorney General, the Secretary General of the Department of the Taoiseach and the Minister and Secretary General of the Department of Justice, Equality and Defence and that there was no discussion at that meeting about the letter or its contents.

Having been informed by the Attorney General the prior evening about these matters I felt that they were of such concern and gravity that I should reflect carefully on them and bring them to the attention of the Government, the Dáil and the Leaders of the Opposition. From that point of view, the Government made its decision to set up a commission of investigation, which is being followed through today in regard to a number of further decisions.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I find the Taoiseach's response incredible and difficult to comprehend. I will read into the record what the Minister said: "I was not briefed on this matter until approximately 6 p.m. on Monday, 24 March 2014 in the Department of Justice and Equality". The Taoiseach said in his response to me that the Minister for Justice and Equality had assured him that he was not briefed about the letter at that meeting. Is that what the Taoiseach is saying?

It is inconceivable that the Minister would have been briefed by departmental officials at 6 p.m. on the Monday about the telephone recording system and would not have been told by them that a letter had been received two weeks earlier from the Garda Commissioner detailing in a reasonably comprehensive manner the background to this issue. What is even more incredible is that the Secretary General who received the letter from the Garda Commissioner under section 41 of the 2005 Act, which is a specific vehicle to facilitate correspondence of this type and gravity - it is not the type of correspondence the Secretary General would receive every week to give to the Minister - is the very man sent by the Taoiseach to the Garda Commissioner to tell him that he [the Taoiseach] and Cabinet Ministers were unhappy about this, even though it has been stated that Cabinet members knew nothing about this. I accept the point made by the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, that the Cabinet did not know about this. The message was conveyed to the Garda Commissioner that the Cabinet was unhappy about the matter and he needed to reflect on it.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Get off the pitch.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The two people who were having the conversation in the house knew about the correspondence. It defies belief that the Minister would not on the Monday evening have been briefed by departmental officials about the content of the letter. The Minister in his speech used words such as "furnished" and "received". What I am talking about is the content of the letter. One could not but be aware of the content of it in discussing the issue of the telephone recordings. The Secretary General was sent to tell the Garda Commissioner to reflect on his position because the Cabinet was very anxious about the matter.

Is the Taoiseach saying that the Minister was not briefed on the content of the letter at 6 p.m. on Monday by his departmental officials?

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

Section 41 of the Garda Síochána Act 2005 states: "The Garda Commissioner shall keep the Minister and the Secretary General of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform fully informed of the following...". The letter was sent to the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality. The letter did contain reference to the fact that the Minister should be informed. The section of the Act is clear. Were the Deputy sending a letter, he would send it to the Minister and the Secretary General. The Act states that the Garda Commissioner shall keep the Minister and the Secretary General of the Department fully informed.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have read the section.

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

I am aware of the chronological sequence in terms of the letters sent to the Minister for Justice and Equality between 10 to 24 March outlining all of the events and so on. When I was briefed by the Attorney General on the gravity of what is involved the order for discovery in the Bailey case was due to conclude on the Tuesday of the Cabinet meeting. That order for discovery included the transcripts of a number of recordings which contained serious matters pertaining to the case. The Garda affidavit has now been signed and sent to the other legal team. I then had to ask myself what was the right thing to do. In my view, the right thing to do was to check the validity, veracity and seriousness of the matter, which was done on Monday-----

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Without asking the Minister.

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

-----with a much clearer view being available on that Monday evening. I was clear, because I wanted to inform the Cabinet, the Dáil and Members of the Opposition, that my concern should be communicated to the Garda Commissioner. I advised the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality to communicate that to the Garda Commissioner.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Secretary General did not inform the Taoiseach that the Commissioner had sent him a letter?

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

I advised him to communicate my concerns to the Garda Commissioner. I thought that was fundamental given the gravity of what was involved.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He ignored the letter.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What were the Taoiseach's concerns on the Monday evening?

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He was concerned about the Cabinet meeting.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Taoiseach respond to my question about the Monday evening briefing? Was the Taoiseach briefed on Monday evening by his officials about the content of the letter?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are over time.

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

The letter from the former Garda Commissioner to the Secretary General is now in the public domain. It can be published so that everybody can read it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Was the Minister briefed about it on Monday?

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

I can confirm that there was no discussion at the meeting held by me about the issue raised by the Deputy. The question of the importance of the transcription of the recordings in the Bailey case was discussed, which, as far as I can ascertain from the chronology set out, took up most of the focus of the Department of Justice and Equality.

For the Deputy's information, the Government today appointed a commission of investigation.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Taoiseach would answer my question about the briefing.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, we are way over time. There is a time limit for everybody.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I only asked one question, which was very straightforward.

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

I will try to be helpful to Deputy Martin. Mr. Justice Fennelly is to chair that commission, which will deal with all matters-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not ask about that.

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

I am telling the Deputy something that he does not know. Mr. Justice Fennelly will chair the commission of investigation, which will look at all matters relevant to tape recordings of conversations and their retention, to the extent of which we are aware at this point but which appear to be growing in number.

During the course of today's Cabinet meeting, the Minister for Justice and Equality received a communication from the Prison Service indicating that on 26 March it became aware of an anomaly in its system whereby the conversations of a number of prisoners, 84 up to 28 March of this year, who had more than one solicitor in the system, had been inadvertently recorded as they were outside the restriction parameters. The Prison Service became aware of this and took immediate steps to rectify the situation. I have a asked the Minister for Justice and Equality for a report from the Prison Service on how this happened.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach is distracting from the core question.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When was that sent to him? Was there a two week delay in that regard?

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

In answer to Deputy Martin's question, the Minister for Justice has assured me that there was no briefing given to him on Monday evening about the contents of the letter.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister received no briefing on the Monday evening from his officials?

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

He did not see the letter until Tuesday.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a Private Members' motion before the House this evening. I call Deputy Adams.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have called Deputy Adams.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach said that the Minister for Justice and Equality did not cause the current crisis. The manner in which he has responded to it is what marks him out as unsuitable for office.

The Government's amazingly inefficient and incohesive response has led me to try to figure out why this is so. I am of the view that I now know why it is so. At the root of this ongoing controversy is the Ian Bailey case. Mr. Bailey wrote to the Taoiseach about his case in February. He has also asserted that he wrote to the Minister, Deputy Shatter, in 2012 regarding delays in a GSOC investigation caused by the former Garda Commissioner's refusal to provide requested material to the investigating team. The Bailey case is the real context of the ongoing scandal. People may or may not have known the level of illegal phone recording that was taking place but the former Garda Commissioner certainly knew. It is a matter of public record that he did not co-operate with GSOC, a matter which gives rise to a number of issues. The Minister for Justice and Equality, the Attorney General and the Department of Justice and Equality also knew. Does the Taoiseach agree that the Ian Bailey case lies at the root of the current difficulties?

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

I agree with Deputy Adams that the process of discovery in the Bailey case crystallised - as a result of the date of closure relating to that process - all of these matters. That is true. While this issue has been ongoing for a considerable period, it was the process of discovery which gave rise to the focus in respect of having the relevant tapes transcribed and assessed in the Bailey case, but also with regard to the wider implications of a much more generalised and systematic practice of tape-recording calls in quite a number of Garda stations throughout the country. Regardless of whether those tapes are legal or illegal, the question of their retention and what to do with them was the subject of a letter from the previous Garda Commissioner to the Data Commissioner. The Attorney General ruled that no tapes should be destroyed. I agree with the Deputy that it was the pending court case in respect of Mr. Bailey and the discovery process which crystallised the focus in respect of this matter and made it imperative that it be brought to the attention - with all the facts having been ascertained - of the Attorney General. She brought it to my attention and I then alerted the Government, the Dáil and the Deputy, as a party leader, to what was involved. On foot of what was brought to my attention, I took action in order to establish a commission of investigation.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

By his account, the Attorney General only brought this matter to the Taoiseach's attention when he phoned her about an unrelated issue. In addition, the Taoiseach did not contact the Minister for Justice and Equality for a further 24 hours. There is no information at all with regard to his contacting or consulting the Tánaiste in respect of this matter. Where is the Tánaiste in all of this?

The Bailey case is crucial because all of those I mentioned knew about that case and about the surveillance, phone tapping, etc., that were carried out. The former Garda Commissioner did not co-operate with GSOC in respect of an investigation relating to that matter. While we are discussing these issues, the State is currently contesting a civil action taken by Ian Bailey and his partner, Jules Thomas. This is despite serious concerns in respect of Garda activities similar to those revealed by the Morris tribunal. There is also the matter of the tainted Garda investigation files relating to the Bailey case being handed over to the French authorities. As a result, there is an international dimension to this.

Let us return to what I am putting forward as a context in respect of why the Minister for Justice and Equality, the Attorney General, the Department of Justice and Equality and its Secretary General and GSOC are all working against each other. When the Taoiseach briefed Deputy Martin and I on this matter, I informed him that I believed what he was telling me. I still have no reason not to believe him. At the heart of what the Government is doing - at the core of which is the Minister for Justice and Equality - is an attempt to engage in a cover-up and to impede other Government and State agencies from investigating the allegations made by Ian Bailey. That is one of the reasons that the Minister for Justice and Equality should go. When he is responding to the matter which is the subject of tonight's Private Members' business, will the Minister clarify his role in respect of the issues I have raised? Ian Bailey has stated that he wrote to the Minister two years ago in respect of the then Garda Commissioner not bringing forward information which he was bound to bring forward under the terms of the Garda Síochána Act. Will the Taoiseach ask the Minister to clarify his role in respect of these matters when he addresses the House later this evening?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind Deputies that this is not a court of law. This is not a place where charges are made against individuals - regardless of their identity - who are not in a position to defend themselves.

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

Sophie Toscan du Plantier was murdered and the crime remains unsolved. The transcribed tapes have a bearing on and a relevance to this matter.

In regard to the Deputy's question about the Minister for Justice and Equality, I came to Dublin on the Sunday in order to attend a function. We were due to debate the Garda inspectorate's report on the following Thursday. All of the commentators were referring to a clash between the parties in government and differences of opinion between Ministers. When I spoke to the Attorney General, the issues of importance she brought to my attention were such that they had to be the subject of serious reflection. The legal analysis of all of the relevant papers became much clearer on the Monday evening at which time I spoke to the Minister for Justice and Equality about the matter. I did not speak to the Tánaiste until the Tuesday morning because the legal personnel were continuing to reflect on the matter. Besides, I wanted the Cabinet to be fully apprised of all the details involved.

The discovery affidavit relating to the Bailey case has now been signed and I understand that the relevant material has been sent to Mr. Bailey's legal team. The concern which arises in this regard is that a woman was murdered and that the case remains unsolved. The issue arising from that murder and from the Bailey case is the focus of a great deal of attention and rightly so. However, the other aspect relates to the much broader situation whereby so many phone calls and conversations were taped and retained - whether legally or illegally - and that these tapes are now being held in secure accommodation in Garda headquarters. The Attorney General has issued a direction to the effect that they should not be destroyed. In the context of the letter from the previous Garda Commissioner to the Attorney General's office, I can confirm that a meeting was held in her office but that she was not present. The meeting was with her officials and the Attorney General was only asked about the request in the context of the generalities involved. The working group that was established did not operate out of the Attorney General's office and neither was her office represented on it. The entity in question was an internal Garda working group. The Attorney General has already clarified the position in this regard.

This is a serious issue and that is why the Government decided to bring about a structural change whereby an independent Garda authority - which will give our police force credibility, the trust of the people, competency, professionalism and oversight - will be established. Political responsibility will be retained by the Minister of the day to the Oireachtas. The commission of investigation, under the stewardship of a Supreme Court judge, will consider all relevant matters of public concern relating to the issues under discussion. I hope we will be in a position to clear the commission's terms of reference in the next week or ten days.

Deputy Adams inquired last week as to whether the Attorney General's phone had been bugged.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can the Taoiseach say that again, please?

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

I am reminded of the day that I was at the opening of the McAleese Bridge across the River Boyne when Deputy Adams and the Deputy First Minister came to me and asked if they could take me away to the side of the stage for a conversation. I said: "Gerry, you cannot take me away anywhere but I am happy to talk to you". Deputy Adams said to me: "We need to speak to you about an important matter that we cannot discuss with you on the telephone".

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach said that last week.

Gerry Adams (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is on the public record that my telephone is being tapped.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Collins, thank you.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Excuse me. I have called Deputy Collins, please. Thank you.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Taoiseach does not trust his own telephone.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will you settle down, please? Deputy Collins, please, without interruption.

Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Shatter-gate affair will rumble on for the next number of weeks and months and it looks like the Taoiseach is standing by his man at this stage. Therefore, I wish to raise another serious issue that is happening at the same time. I want to raise concerns regarding reports in the media that pressure is being applied to the Irish Central Bank to quickly off-load, through the private market, the €25 billion in bonds which were exchanged for the promissory note last year. According to the ECB President, Mario Draghi, the bank is reviewing the promissory note deal as part of its annual review of 2013. It seems there is still a question within the ECB regarding the legality of the promissory notes and the subsequent bonds held by the Central Bank. Questions are being raised about whether the deal contravenes Article 123 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. This article prohibits central banks from giving monetary support to member states. According to unnamed sources in the ECB, as reported in the media, there are concerns within the ECB regarding what it terms "the pace of liquidation", in other words, there is not much the bank can do about the promissory note deal but it is looking for the bonds to be sold off quickly.

Is the Taoiseach concerned that, coming out of the review, major pressure will be exerted on the Government and the Central Bank to sell off these bonds to the private market? There are a number of problems to be posed if the bonds are sold off. It would weaken the negotiating position of future governments to secure a deal on the bank bailout. Like most people, I have given up on any idea that this Government will seriously pursue a write-down of the debt. While the bonds are with the Central Bank, interest payments accrue to the State in the final analysis. However, if they are sold these interest payments go to the market investors.

As the Taoiseach is aware, the legality of the promissory notes and the associated bonds are, as per the Constitution, subject to an appeal by myself, to be heard, hopefully, this summer, in the Supreme Court. Will the Taoiseach give a commitment to resist the pressures to sell off the €25 billion in bonds in the next period?

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

The position is that the ECB decided that the deal does not contravene monetary policy and is quite legal. Therefore, the answer to Deputy Collins's question is that the Irish Central Bank will dispose of the bonds in accordance with the timeline that has already been set out and agreed.

Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is not the information that is coming down. The ECB is putting considerable pressure on the Central Bank to sell off the €25 billion as quickly as possible. That is the information we have. I have written to the Central Bank Governor, Professor Honohan, in this regard, and raised my concerns about the issue. If the Government sells off the bonds it will put more pressure on the backs of ordinary people in respect of austerity, cuts and the water taxes coming down the line. I am asking the Government to resist any pressure from the ECB to force of the Government to sell off these bonds to the sharks that made money on the backs of ordinary Irish people.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The sharks of government are over there.

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

The report in today's newspapers is not correct. For the Deputies information, I am informed by the Minister for Finance that the nominal value of the bonds is now €4 billion higher than it was when the deal was done because of falling interest rates.