Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1971 > Committee of Public Accounts > Final Report - Northern Ireland Relief Expenditure

MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE

(Minutes of Evidence)

Céadaoin, 4 Lúnasa, 1971

Wednesday, 4th August, 1971

The Committee met at 4 p.m.

DEPUTY P. HOGAN in the chair.

ORDER OF DÁIL OF 1st DECEMBER, 1970.

Captain James J. Kelly in attendance accompanied by Mr. P. Sutherland, barrister-at-law and Mrs. Moynihan, solicitor.

11813. Chairman.—Captain Kelly, you have requested that you be permitted to cross-examine two witnesses who have been here before us and to address the Committee. The Supreme Court has ruled that you are entitled to just that and the Committee have decided to give you these facilities. I understand that you are being represented by Counsel Mr. Sutherland and being advised by Mrs. Moynihan. We got a reply from the two persons concerned, the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries, Deputy Gibbons, and Mr. Fleming. Deputy Gibbon’s letter addressed to me reads as follows:—

Dear Deputy,

I have received your letter of the 29th July, 1971. Since I have already given evidence of all matters in my knowledge relevant to your inquiry I do not propose to attend before your Committee again.

Yours faithfully,

James Gibbons.

The other letter we got in respect of Chief Superintendent Fleming was addressed to the Secretary of the Committee, Mr. Tobin, and reads:—

31st July, 1971.

A Chara,

Chief Superintendent Fleming has been on annual leave and will be for a further week. There are, as you will appreciate, various aspects to be considered and it is not possible to deal with them until the Chief Superintendent has resumed duty. A further communication will be sent to you as soon as possible.

Mise, le meas,

A. I. Flood,

Deputy Commissioner

(Acting Commissioner).

Mr. Sutherland.—If I might address through the Chair the Committee with regard to the points that have been raised in these letters. My client alleges that he was defamed before this Committee and before the nation by evidence given by these two witnesses. It has not been made clear, in the first instance, in Chief Superintendent Fleming’s letter whether Chief Superintendent Fleming is in fact in Dublin. They have failed, I would respectfully submit, to show either my client or this Committee the courtesy of their attendance today. They have in the past, by their allegations, impugned Captain Kelly’s honour as an Irishman and as an Army officer and by their failure to attend, when requested to do so by this Committee, to face cross-examination on the facts which they put before this Committee they have effectively borne out my client’s contention that much of their evidence was false evidence. They have shown, furthermore, the contempt of a judgment given in the High Court.

I am not prepared at this juncture to exercise my right to address, on behalf of my client, this Committee. I understand that I would be entitled to make such an address. However, I came here today briefed to cross-examine these two witnesses on behalf of my client. I have not been afforded the opportunity to do so. The first question that I would like to ask, Mr. Chairman, is what steps, if any, do the Committee intend to take at this stage regarding the failure of the two witnesses to attend today, having been requested to do so in accordance with the High Court judgment.

11814. Chairman.—Mr. Sutherland, I think it may be argued at this point that it is now a matter between your client and the Supreme Court who issued this judgment.

Mr. Sutherland.—Do I take it that the Committee do not intend to enter into any further correspondence or to make any further request to Deputy Gibbons and to Superintendent Fleming regarding their attendance?

11815. Chairman.—We have requested them to come in the usual way and as far as we know we have not power to go any further. Mr. Fleming has not specifically declined to come as yet.

Mr. Sutherland.—Apparently. Deputy Gibbons is the only one who has declined to come. When the opportunity arises my client will be looking for the opportunity to cross-examine Mr. Fleming. With regard to Deputy Gibbons, the situation as far as my client is concerned is, first of all, that an address will be made on his behalf, if this is acceptable to the Committee. I would require some time to prepare such an address in consultation with my client. I was under the impression, until I arrived here today, that I could cross-examine Deputy Gibbons on the facts at issue before the Committee. Consequently, I would ask with regard to this address—I will need time to consider the matter further—that I will be given an opportunity within the next 24 hours to read it to the Committee. I will be making this address on behalf of my client because I have been precluded from doing anything else.

11816. Chairman.—He wants to address us tomorrow. Do we need to consider this in private?

11817. Deputy FitzGerald.—Could I ask is it his intention to make a general address on behalf of his client or to address us in relation to the evidence of Deputy Gibbons?

Mr. Sutherland.—It would be solely confined to Deputy Gibbons’s evidence. I would hope to have an opportunity in the future of cross-examining Mr. Fleming.

11818. Deputy Nolan.—Your address would be on the matter of Deputy Gibbons’s evidence?

Mr. Sutherland.—Deputy Gibbons’s evidence to the Committee.

11819. Deputy FitzGerald.—Would it not be more convenient to do the two jobs at once, to wait until he knows that Mr. Fleming is coming, rather than to have two bites at the cherry?

Mr. Sutherland.—I think my client would prefer if I dealt with my address on the evidence of Deputy Gibbons as soon as possible.

11820. Chairman.—Would tomorrow morning be convenient?

Mr. Sutherland.—Would it be possible to do so in the afternoon? I will need some time to prepare the address.

11821. Deputy FitzGerald.—We understand that.

11822. Chairman.—Four o’clock in the afternoon?

Mr. Sutherland.—That would be fine.

11823. Deputy FitzGerald.—Could he indicate how long his address is likely to take?

11824. Chairman.—It is hardly necessary to say this but I feel I am obliged to say it: your statement will be relevant to the evidence submitted already?

Mr. Sutherland.—It will, of course.

11825. Chairman.—And it will be confined as much as possible to character and to money, that is the fund?

Mr. Sutherland.—Generally that.

The Committee deliberated.