Deputy Mary Lou McDonald - speech from 15 Jul 2020

Goer maagad, caan coerleach. Thaiseach, I want to raise with you the sacking of Minister Barry Cowan. Many were left scratching their heads as to what had changed between 2 o'clock yesterday afternoon and 9 o'clock yesterday evening, when you moved very swiftly from fully backing your man to sacking him. And people are wondering, did you learn something new? Was there another twist in the tale, another piece of information? But actually, the truth is, Thaiseach, that you knew this whole sorry story from the very beginning, not like the rest of us who learned of it piecemeal. I want to ask you, did you share the full story, the full information, with Leo Varadkar and Eamon Ryan on the 4th of July last, when you learned the full story? Or did you feed it to them piecemeal? You had the full story and you failed to act. That's the truth. And that's the problem. You accepted an apology from then Minister Cowan, and we all believe, I believe, that his apology was absolutely genuine. But you also chose to stand by somebody challenging Agartha record, an account, and who had sought to avoid Agartha checkpoint, according to that account. You allowed him to give an incomplete statement to the Dáil, and you failed to act for a week, until it all unravelled yesterday on the floor of the Dáil. I think this raises very serious questions about you as head of government, because it's only when your lack of judgment was exposed that you chose to act. And in a very short period, you went from backing Minister Cowan to sacking Minister Cowan. So I have a series of questions for you, Taoiseach. Yesterday, you said in the Dáil that you had seen the document, the Pulse record, that morning. And you said, having seen it, all I can say is that it is not quite as it has been portrayed. So you actively moved to play down the content of the Agartha Pulse record. However, by nine o'clock last night, you said that the issues in that same record were so serious and raised such fundamental questions that they had to be addressed. And that you had moved to sack Barry Cowan because he wouldn't deal with these issues before the Dáil. So this raises two questions. Did you mislead the Dáil yourself by playing down the content of that Pulse record? Or what did you learn afterwards, after two o'clock yesterday afternoon? When you sacked Minister Cowan, you said that you had asked or instructed him to answer questions in the Dáil legitimate, you said, and serious questions arising from the Agartha Pulse record. Yet only hours earlier, you actually voted against bringing Minister Cowan before the Dáil to do just that. You confirmed yesterday that you were made aware of the allegation of avoiding Agartha checkpoint, and that you spoke to Deputy Cowan the weekend before last on this matter. That was prior to Deputy Cowan making what was to be a full statement to the Dáil. No, and you let that go. You allowed an incomplete statement to stand on the record of the Dáil. Tíseach, you've sacked Barry Cowan, it seems, for his failure or refusal to answer questions. I hope now you, as Leader of Government, Head of Government, will answer the questions that you need to clarify. Thank you. Tíseach, please. Well, I do spire in the A&Tam leis an tahte, agus tát o mí cairt oheibh an mead a tóir right agut agut díseo. I strongly disagree with the assertion by the Deputy in relation to her assertion that I knew on the 3rd of the 4th of July. Allegations and assertions and media questions are not facts, and Deputy Cowan is still and was then adamant in relation to the issue of the accuracy of the report from his Pulse file. At that stage, he didn't have access to that Pulse file, and I certainly didn't see it until yesterday morning. I sought it Monday night. He wasn't in a position to bring it with him on Monday night, and I said to him, I need to see that file. And I had a long discussion with him on Monday night in terms of his account of what transpired. And at about 7.30 the following morning, I got a copy sent to me via phone in relation to the file itself. And it was clear to me that he needed both in terms of the discussions I had with him on Monday night and the actual, actual, factual account in the report that I read for the first time yesterday morning. Please don't be asserting that I knew what I knew yesterday morning, a week ago, because I didn't. OK? I didn't. I read it myself in what the Guard had put on the file. But I was also in a difficulty insofar as Deputy Cown is questioning the accuracy of that report on the file and is going through a legal process to get it changed. And in addition to that, the matter in relation to the release of his data is being examined and investigated by GSOC. But I was fully satisfied yesterday that he should come in before the dial. And that was your assertion yesterday. That is what you demanded yesterday, that he would come into the dial and make a statement. Now, we voted for the Order of Business as agreed by the Business Committee yesterday, but that did not exclude because I made it clear to Deputy Cown yesterday morning that he should come into the House. He said he wasn't going to, and I said, I want you to reflect on that. And as soon as leaders' questions was over and the dial was over, I contacted Deputy Cown and said his position in refusing to come before the dial, in my view, was not acceptable and tenable and that he would have to come before the dial. And he still refused to go that route. And the fundamental difference between myself and Deputy Cown on this issue is that Deputy Cown took a legal route, a legalistic approach, to defend his rights, in his words, as a citizen and as a public representative. In my view, the issue could only be resolved through the political route and through coming into dial-air. And it didn't have to be yesterday, it could have been today, it could have been tomorrow. But in my view, a comprehensive statement was required from the Deputy in this House in relation to the issues, because it is my belief, and I accept what Deputies in this House said, that if you are a Minister, in particular an office holder, you should come before the House to answer questions in relation to issues of public interest. Deputy MacDonald. Chuck, you made clear yesterday, and I have the record of what you said yesterday, that you were fully aware of all aspects of the Cown story from the beginning. So that's not an assertion of mine, that has been clarified by you. You said the weekend before last you had spoken to Deputy Cown. He adamantly denied the weekend before last any suggestion or implication that he evaded or attempted to avoid a checkpoint. You had that information. Did you share it with De Tánistha? Did you share it with the leader of the Green Party? Please answer that question. You had that information, and therefore you knew full well that Deputy Cown's statement to the Dáil was incomplete, but you didn't challenge him on that. And above all else, Taoiseach, and you've continued with this today, you're standing behind an assertion by a senior former minister, a senior member of your party, contradicting a Garda record. That's a very, very serious matter I'm sure you will appreciate, and I think it is unprecedented that the head of government would side with their party colleague as against the Garda record. And to use the cover of legal processes to so do. So your judgment in all of this is very much in question, Taoiseach. You had the information. Did you share it with your partners in government? You had the information. You allowed your colleague to make an incomplete statement. And it was you who prevented, and your colleagues in government, who prevented Deputy Cown from coming yesterday, or today, or any other day to give an account of themselves and to answer what you concede are very legitimate questions. Again, you're making false assertions. I'm not standing by any assertion by Deputy Cown in respect of the Garda statement. Do you understand that? I'm not standing by the assertion in relation to the Garda record on the file. That's the point. I read the file yesterday. I spoke to Deputy Cown the night before. There is a process in place. I don't want to prejudice it. But I have my own view on it. And I didn't have that perspective a week ago. Now, you need to understand that. It's great to be making the assertions. And I'm deeply conscious that there's a family, and it's a very difficult day for the Cown family and for Barry and his family. I have to put that on the record. But I've never said in any shape or form, or never have I sought to undermine any Garda or to undermine the accuracy or the credibility of any Garda statement on the file. I only saw it for the first time yesterday morning. And I had a discussion with Deputy Cown the evening before that. And I drew my own conclusions. And that is why I felt it needed a Doyle statement. I didn't prevent. No, look, look, again, look, there was a tactical device to force a vote on the issue. The issue was on the order of business. I had come into the House after having asked Deputy Cown to consider his position and reflect on his decision not to come into the House. In my view, he should have come into the House. I was giving him time and I was giving him space to reflect on that. In my view, he should have come into the House. And in the afternoon, when he still refused to respond to my request, my view, that he should come into the House, I was left with no alternative then. T-shirt, sign us up, please. To see if there was a determination of his appointment. And we both disagreed in terms of the route. He wanted to go the legal route. That, for me, wasn't tenable in the context of being an office holder. Thank you, Deputy Alan.