Mattie McGrath: Rejects impeachment, demands Minister for Justice answer

I do want to say that the Rural Independent Group, as Deputy Michael Hilliard did last Tuesday, that we are not in favour of this. We have no interest in an impeachment process, we have made that quite clear, there are no grounds for impeachment. But we do want the Minister for Justice to come in here, and her predecessor should be coming in here, because he slipped out a note. This was host failing at his worst, Taoiseach, and I asked you at the leaders' meeting, were you aware that this name was coming to Cabinet that day and you never answered me? So, I mean, you have done a deal, obviously a murky deal, the Supreme Court is the highest court in the land, and we all have to do processes. Anybody who is on the Board of Management or whatever now understands those processes and how people have to absent themselves if they are connected. This was already up, and Shane Ross, Minister Ross, to his credit, stopped me from doing it for 10 months. The minute he got him out of government, he was not gone at the election when the letter started moving, two days before the election, the letter started moving between the Chief Justice and Minister Flanagan. That was the start you thought Minister Ross would be gone in a few days. He lost his seat, but there was a caretaker government, and he stopped that being done, and his baguiding of the people. You talk about separation of the public, and the courts, and the judiciary, and the House here politically. You are damaging him every day by prevarigating here. We want the Minister for Justice in here to answer. We did allow, and often do allow, to have a swap on a road trip to Ministers. We will not do that now, because you are baguiding the House. I have answered questions on this, on a number of occasions now. Sorry, I have answered questions, and I have answered them straightly, by the way. I just want to say through the Chair, if I may, I have made it clear, and it is all laid out in terms of how this appointment was made. There was no horse trading involved. There was no involvement whatsoever in terms of judicial appointments, and the formation of government, or the program for government. Any assertion to the contrary is false. You can make all the accusations you like, Deputy. Just because you make them, doesn't mean they are correct. I know what I signed up to, and what I didn't sign up to. The proof of the pudding is that I followed the JAB recommendation in terms of the suitability of the candidate, so that I would not embroil myself in judicial appointments. That is the point, because it goes back to February when the invitation came, last February when the request came in terms of the need to fill the vacancy. The 9th of March last, the judicial appointments advisory board met, as long before any negotiations of any government, and then they recommended Seamus Wolfe. I mean, those are the facts. That is the only context. So I was not embroiling myself in the position. As far as I am concerned, the judicial appointments advisory board, that is chaired by the Chief Justice, if I may. Six members have posed questions to the Taoiseach, all of them without interruption. Now, will you let him respond, please, with the same courtesy that was extended to yourself? Taoiseach. To make the point, in answer to the questions and the assertions that were made, the judicial appointments advisory board is chaired by the Chief Justice. It has presidents of the four courts involved. Please. The four presidents of the four courts involved. Please. Members of the Law Society as well. Please. That is what I did not ignore. I accepted their recommendation as to the suitability of Justice Wolfe. That is the point from my perspective. I had no interest in embroiling myself in the politics of this. Good, bad or indifferent. And when it came to the government once it was established to ratify that, that is the context in which I ratified it. I have answered that repeatedly. And in terms of other judges indicating their interests, that has been answered. What goes to the AG of the day? It goes to the Minister for Justice. The Minister for Justice then brings it to the Cabinet, the nominee for appointment. That has always been the position. That has always been consistently the position. One name comes to Cabinet by the Minister for Justice. The Minister for Justice will answer questions here in the House on this issue. And that has been made clear by the Minister. All right, thank you. The Tornister also has answered questions on this on a consistent basis. No, no, no, no. Can you please? What? Not alone now. Thank you.