Order of Business - 13th December 2005

Order of Business – 13th December 2005

Mr. Norris: I support the calls for the Minister of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to come to the House and make a statement. We should have a debate on the matter, at the very least. However, I find myself in some disagreement with my colleague and friend, Senator Brian Hayes. I do not think the Connolly response is more important than the issues facing the Minister. Mr. Connolly is a single individual and I do not think he should be forced into a libel court. That is a choice he can make, if he wishes, but I do not agree with the argument that if someone makes an allegation against an individual, he or she must go to the libel court.
There are issues of principle at stake. I am worried because I detect what I would call the "Eileen Flynn syndrome" whereby the Minister does not like the political background, political choices or the acquaintances of a certain individual and therefore the law does not operate to protect that individual's rights. The law should do so and I find it extraordinary that the Minister used parliamentary privilege in the way he did, in particular his use of a written reply, where he could not be interrupted by the Ceann Comhairle and told to stop because he was naming people outside the House.
I remind Senators that this is the Minister who introduced penalties of up to five years in prison for gardaí who leaked information to journalists. The Minister said, in that context, "I am not supposed to just throw out into the public domain facts which haven't been proven in court about people." What has changed to enable him to completely reverse this position and to do precisely what he said he should not do?
We are entitled to an explanation because the chairman of the Centre for Public Inquiry, Mr. Justice Flood, has argued that the Minister's action amounts to a drumhead court martial. In other words, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has established himself as judge and jury. Professor Walsh has argued that the question of undermining the Constitution arises in this scenario. This is a very serious and regrettable situation.
One final question, which should be asked -----

An Cathaoirleach: Senator, we cannot discuss the matter now. We will have a debate -----

Mr. Norris: Will the Leader ask the Minister, if he is not able to come to the House, to answer two specific questions?

The Minister indicated that democracy was under threat and there was a threat to public safety. If he is not able to come to the House I ask the Leader to inquire of him as to the nature of that threat to the State. The Minister has not spelt that out. In what manner was it properly addressed by his action? We are entitled to know.

I ask the Leader to continue the series of debates on Iraq. Cindy Sheehan, whose son
was killed in Iraq, is outside the gates of this building today. We discussed the
aeroplanes that passed through Shannon Airport and she told me she would personally
sink a hatchet into any aeroplane that she thought might be carrying a boy like her son
off to be murdered by George Bush. We must bear that in mind while we press for
information on the aeroplanes that still stop at Shannon Airport.