Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an Taoiseach agus an Rialtas tar éis saoire ró-fhada. Tá a fhios ag gach duine thart faoin tír nach bhfuil an Rialtas seo ag comhlíonadh na ngeallúintí a chuir siad os comhair an phobail agus go bhfuil a ré ag teacht chun deiridh.

This is the first Leaders' Questions in the new session and there is a number of serious issues that could be discussed. We will have an opportunity to make comments in respect of Northern Ireland and decommissioning later. There are also issues in regard to the disgraceful and obscene waste of public money as shown in the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. Questions must be answered also about the issue of Thornton Hall during today's Private Members' debate.

I wish to deal with a particular matter in a constructive way and to suggest the Taoiseach's intervention in a manner which might bring about a break in the related impasse, which is of growing concern. The Taoiseach is aware that more than 90 days ago, five men were committed to prison for failing to abide by the terms of a court injunction. The issues that gave rise to that imprisonment are complex and the resolution of the dispute between the company involved, Shell, and the five men from Rossport will not be easy. Efforts have been made by a number of individuals and authorities to break this impasse and to deal with the issue of safety reviews so that the question of the safety of the pipeline can be answered one way or the other. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, must make a decision in respect of this at a later date.

I have spoken to the imprisoned men and their families, Shell representatives and anybody else associated with this matter. I have tried to put forward constructive proposals that will break the impasse. There is now a complete contradiction and a polarisation of views in that the company says it cannot lift the injunction and the men say they will not purge their contempt. I gave the latter a legal perspective last week based on a case of civil contempt.

We have had intractable problems in this State in the past. Men such as Mr. George Mitchell and General John de Chastelain were called in and were able, over a period, to resolve issues of fundamental difference. Will the Taoiseach, as leader of the Government, involve himself in this matter? Perhaps he might appoint a mediator of considerable standing, acceptable to both sides, who would set about breaking this impasse. It will not be solved by hysterics but only by dialogue, discussion and compromise. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, on behalf of the Government, must make a fundamental decision one way or the other.

Throughout the summer Deputy Kenny has adopted a constructive approach at all times. I accept the way he has put the current situation in this issue. He is correct that it cannot be resolved other than by means of a thoughtful process of trying to engage. Needless to say, I have been dealing with this issue throughout July and since 25 August, when I returned, and I have talked with the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey about it. There has been no Cabinet meeting since the end of June at which it has not been discussed in one form or another. I regret that anyone should be committed to prison as a result of his or her opposition to the development of the Corrib gas field. I accept that it has been a traumatic time for the men and their families.

Deputy Kenny knows that we cannot intervene in a decision of the High Court. However, every effort has been made to create the conditions — efforts which Deputy Kenny is asking me to continue — that would allow them to purge their contempt. The Minister, who maintained total consultation with me, initially made contact through an intermediary with the five men in prison to discuss their concerns. He proposed a safety review by an independent body as a response to those concerns because the initial part involved safety issues. Despite this and his willingness to meet them if they purged their contempt, the men decided not to do so.

The Minister then, in conjunction with the Cabinet, ordered an additional comprehensive safety review of the onshore upstream gas pipeline to be carried out by independent internationally recognised experts. Advantica was identified as the successful bidder and was appointed in the third week of August. The company is a world leader in development and application. As Deputy Kenny is aware, the safety review is ongoing. An issue of particular concern to local residents is proximity and that is being looked at.

There will be a two-day public hearing shortly. People with strong views may put their concerns forward at that. We have made numerous attempts at finding a breakthrough in this. We will continue to do so. Most of these efforts are on the public record, although perhaps not all are. We have tried to find a way to deal with the issue satisfactorily.

Our main concern has been to put monitoring and verification procedures in place to ensure that the developer complies with all the legal consent issues. There has been a long chapter and verse in this. Yesterday, the Minister spent three hours in the committee discussing this. There is no need for me to repeat it here. We will continue to seek constructive ways forward. I and Deputy Kenny, who has been very constructive in this, have attempted through mediators to find a way to break the impasse which will not interfere with the High Court decision but, through no fault of our own, have not yet been successful.

There are a number of other persons of sufficient stature who would be willing to become involved in this if the imprimatur of the Government were given. It is a fact that this was badly handled by the local authority in some aspects. It was very badly handled by the Government and by Shell and it has led to a complete breakdown in communications. It is impossible for me to express the frustration and anxiety of the families involved in this.

This is a national question in terms of energy that should be harnessed without any impact of the health or safety of citizens. No project is worth that. The Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, promised publicly last year to provide money from his Department to bring a pipeline to Belmullet. Other Ministers promised spur lines all over the west. These represent broken promises by the Government.

Is the Taoiseach happy that the transfer of authority from the Government and Bord Gáis to a private company such as Shell is constitutional given the inviolability of property rights under the Constitution? In other words, was proper procedure followed in every instance and does it stand up legally?

In the interests of attempting to create dialogue and an environment in which progress may be made so that the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, will be allowed to make a decision one way or the other, will the Taoiseach consider the appointment of a mediator who is of sufficient stature, acceptable to both parties and may be able to break this impasse?

The Gas (Amendment) Act 2000 provides the legislative basis. This has been discussed many times and our advice throughout has been that it is totally compatible with the legal position.

On the safety issues, I will not rehearse all that the Minister said yesterday but at all times during the entire process, all the necessary protections were put in place. People will have the opportunity to put forward their views during the two-day public hearing in County Mayo which will be held on 12 and 13 October and will be chaired by John Gallagher, senior counsel. There have been a number of views. We and Advantica have gone to great lengths to ensure that all procedures have been complied with.

On the question of a mediator, Deputy Kenny will be aware that various groups and individuals from the church, community, politics and other areas have been tried. There is no doubt that to avoid intervening with a decision of the High Court, which we cannot do, a mediator would be very useful if both sides were agreeable to such an initiative. However, indications until now have been that the men will not engage until they are out of jail. That does not resolve the difficulty but that is the position. If Deputy Kenny is indicating that the men are perhaps willing to work with a mediator without conditions, I am willing to make such a move. That has been my position all along. I have continued to engage throughout this and any new initiatives that can help to resolve this unfortunate situation will be welcomed.