Dáil debates

Wednesday, 8 February 2017

Ceisteanna - Questions

Departmental Records

2:30 pm

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

9. To ask the Taoiseach the number of files withheld by his department in respect of the files transferred to the National Archives in respect of the year 1986; and the number withheld under sections 8(4)(a), (b) and (c), respectively, of the National Archives Act 1986. [4270/17]

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

A total of 1,578 files or file parts in respect of the year 1986 were transferred by my Department to the National Archives. They were then released for public inspection on 1 January 2017. Eight files were withheld in full.

The grounds for withholding records under section 8(4) of the National Archives Act 1986 are that it would be contrary to the public interest; or would or might constitute a breach of statutory duty or a breach of good faith on the grounds that they contain information supplied in confidence; or that it would or might cause distress or danger to living persons on the ground that they contain information about individuals or would or might be likely to lead to an action for damages for defamation.

Of the eight files withheld by my Department, three files were withheld under section 8(4)(a), one file was withheld under section 8(4)(b) and four were withheld under section 8(4)(b) and (c) of the Act.

The evaluation of files for release to the National Archives is carried out by designated officials in my Department. I have no role in that process.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is always intriguing when files are withheld because all of these files are of national interest. With regard to the eight files withheld, can the Taoiseach give an indication, even in broad strokes, of what subject matters they covered? Is the determination made by one official or is there an oversight or appeals system? The default position should be that they be released unless there is a very compelling case otherwise. Third, will the files ever be published? Once a single civil servant makes the determination, is that it for all time? Are they never to be accessible to posterity?

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

The evaluation of the files is carried out by designated officials. In determining the release of files a balance must be struck between providing the most complete documentation possible and the section of the Act I mentioned. With regard to Northern Ireland files, it is normal that certain records containing sensitive security or personal information will be retained under section 8(4). After consultation with the National Archives a number of 70 year old files that were previously withheld under section 8(4) were released or are now eligible for release.

The Deputy asked if there is an appeals system.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it just one civil servant making the determination?

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

I will have to get details on that for the Deputy.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Do they ever become public?

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

Not all the files are in compliance with the records management of the Department and the Acts.

I will find out if there is an appeals system or if it is irrevocable. I do not assume it is irrevocable. If some of the files that are 70 years old that were originally refused under section 8(5)(a), which is about matters contrary to the public interest, there may be no danger to the public interest releasing those very old files now.

2:40 pm

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

Gabhaim buíochas leis on Taoiseach as ucht an freagra a thabhairt. My question is on Government files. I recently wrote to the Taoiseach following revelations that the British army and RUC special branch used waterboarding in the North during the 1970s. This was uncovered when the Pat Finucane Centre revealed that Government papers from London had revealed the use of waterboarding as a torture technique and that it continued after the British Government claimed it had ended. British Government files revealed that the then Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, raised a specific case with the British Prime Minister of the day, Ted Heath.

I have asked the Taoiseach to release the Government's minutes. We have only the British Government's version of the meeting. It is obviously in the public interest. Although it happened so long ago, it is an issue of current importance. I also urge the Taoiseach to ensure the Government undertakes a review of files in other Departments dealing with the North to identify any other information which may be available to the Government about the use of torture. Given that the Taoiseach of the day felt strong enough to raise the issue, one wonders what happened afterwards and whether it was pursued How did the Government of the day and subsequent Governments deal with this important issue?

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

It is very good that the State releases archives. It is probably the one centre in a democracy that has the capacity to release comprehensive archives. Not all actors in dramatic situations are in a position to release their archives or are disposed to do so. It is positive. Normally, the release of archives is a smooth operation. During recent years, for some reason, a new practice has emerged whereby it is preceded by an announcement by the Minister that the papers are on their way. It is like a Minister announcing that he or she is confident the sun will shine in the morning. It is a curious practice. It is the only political involvement.

The Taoiseach used the phrase "contrary to the public interest". At times, this can be a very subjective assessment. Deputy Brendan Howlin's question is reasonable. Surely, there must be a second opinion, maybe some time later, as to whether it is contrary to the public interest that files that are 70 years old are still not being released. Down through the years, there was a conservative approach in the public service generally to the release of files. To ease the concerns of historians and others who might feel they are missing out on some gems or particularly interesting nuggets of detail and information, a system of second opinion or further examination would be useful in determining whether something is contrary to the public interest or would lead to litigation in the event of archives being published.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I too raise the interests of future historians and economists. The Central Bank wrote to the Houses asking that we destroy or return all records relating to the banking inquiry. At the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, I expressed the importance that the material be kept somewhere, whether in the Central Bank or the National Archives, to guarantee that in the future when people are looking back, they have access to all the material. Will the Taoiseach, through his Department, check with the Central Bank that it is happening? While I have no problem with the Houses destroying all the records, it is very important that there be a record somewhere, probably in the Central Bank or the Department of Finance, of such material. I am concerned that if we are destroying it, the material should exist somewhere else in archive.

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

I will have it checked. We discussed this before regarding the information on the residential institutions redress scheme. Although there were calls for all of it to be destroyed, it was agreed that it should be protected. I accept that there should be a system for second opinions or appeals. It cannot depend on the decision of one person. I am sure it is the case, and I will confirm this to the Deputies. I do not know whether Deputy Martin's remarks about making announcements on what is coming or whether the sun is to shine are confined to one Minister or several Ministers.

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

Apologies.

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

Deputy Gerry Adams wrote to me and I received and read his letter. I have asked that the files in question, in so far as they are available, be examined. I will respond to his question. I am not sure if there is a connection to other Departments. In so far as we can trace these matters, we will do so. I commend the Pat Finucane Centre on its investigative analysis and for coming across the fact that waterboarding was used as a method of torture in the 1970s.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

During the previous Government, Ireland formally joined the Open Government Partnership and one of the first commitments we made was to open data. I take it that the Administration is following up on the Open Government Partnership initiative and is pursuing the issue of open data. For future archives, it is much more complicated to capture discussions between civil servants that are generated around meetings and interactions between Departments when they are in electronic form. I trust there is a very robust, world standard mechanism for capturing proper Government papers for the future that are now generated in electronic form.

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

I am sure it is the case. Does the Deputy mean at Cabinet meetings?

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I mean all public data, including Cabinet meetings. Up to now, things were written or typed. Now, much of it is e-mailed or done electronically. I presume it will be done-----

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

When the Freedom of Information Act was introduced by the then Minister, Ruairí Quinn, there were suggestions made at the end of papers by certain civil servants that things were going to change in respect of what they would write or notes they would take at meetings. I will have the matter checked to see what the scale, standard and integrity of the recording of official papers is.