The statement by the Minister for Justice and Equality last evening left many people very disappointed and left many more questions to be answered. He succeeded in dragging the Garda Commissioner into this debacle, claiming that it was through a casual aside that he learned of the information about Deputy Wallace, although earlier in the week, he had said it was an official briefing or that he was advised. He failed, however, to explain how such a minor incident involving a Deputy could find its way up to the Commissioner's desk, despite the fact that it was not even recorded on the PULSE system and, furthermore, why the Commissioner felt it necessary to pass that information on to him. The crucial issue remains as to why the Minister decided to utilise that information in a political debate to undermine a political opponent.

His non-apology was an insult and it missed the point. Deputy Wallace may be entitled to a personal apology but the issue is much wider than that. It is about the abuse of private information about a citizen that comes into the possession of a Minister. Is that right or wrong? The apology should have been about the misuse of that information and the abuse of his position. It was a half-hearted apology but, crucially, it missed the essential point, the essence of this issue.

He does not do apologies.

The Garda Commissioner is entitled to brief the Minister on serious issues but he or she is also entitled to expect that he will treat such information sensitively, properly and confidentially and that he will not seek to politicise the information given to him by the Commissioner in a political debate to undermine a political opponent. Can the Commissioner trust the Minister again with sensitive information about anybody or any issue?

The Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Sherlock, the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Alan Kelly, Deputy Phelan and others have made it clear that they have concerns about how the Minister has handled this issue. The Tánaiste said there were issues to be looked at.

A question, please. The Deputy is over time.

Does the Tánaiste believe it was right for the Minister to use private information about a Deputy supplied to him by the Garda Commissioner in the manner he did? Is it right or is it wrong?

First, the Minister has dealt with this.

No, he has not.

He came into the House yesterday and he made a full statement on the issue. He apologised and said he was sorry for what happened. It is important that we get a little perspective on this. We need to look at what has happened here. A series of allegations were made about serious criminality and corruption in the Garda Síochána in the administration of the penalty points system. The allegations were taken up by a number of Deputies who repeated them in public and in the House. Individuals were named in the House before the investigation was undertaken. There were wide-ranging and sweeping allegations, which have not been stood up. It was a bad episode that allegations were made about people which were not stood up.

The Minister launched an investigation, which involved considerable Garda resources, and it has shown there is no evidence of criminality or corruption. However, it found disappointing failings in the way in which the penalty points system is administered and, as the Deputy will be aware, disciplinary proceedings are being taken in a number of cases. That was the context in which the remarks were made.

The Minister addressed the issue of the context in which the Garda Commissioner made the information available to him. Allegations were made, as I recall, by at least one Deputy that public officials had intervened to have road traffic offences in some way disappeared by the Garda. In his statement to the House yesterday, the Minister said "I have no doubt that the Garda Commissioner was mindful too that Deputy Wallace might make public reference to the incident as part of the public controversy which was going on about fixed charge notices and in these circumstances he had a duty to mention it to me".

The Minister wanted to go first.

The bottom line is that the Minister has made a statement to the House.

Does the Tánaiste believe him?

He has responded to questions about it, he has apologised about it and he has said he is sorry.

Does the Tánaiste believe him?

The Minister did not say he was sorry for what he did. He said: "If Deputy Wallace believes I did him a personal wrong by mentioning it, I have no problem in saying I am sorry." That is not an apology. He did not say he was sorry for misusing private information on an individual to politically undermine him. This is wider than Deputy Wallace and the Tánaiste needs to get that point. If he was on this side of the House, he would say that exact same thing. The Minister said the exact same thing in terms of the unsuitability of a Minister in any Government using such information to score political points and to undermine a political opponent. He said it would be unacceptable behaviour for any Minister to do that in any Government. He steadfastly refused last evening to answer questions put to him regarding that quotation which came from his very mouth. He did not apologise last evening and he has not apologised. He stood over the misuse of private information supplied to him by the Garda Commissioner.

Abuse.

The Taoiseach has 100% supported him in doing that and the Tánaiste is now 100% supporting him as well. He thinks it is okay to use private information that the Garda Commissioner or gardaí give to the Minister for Justice and Equality. The Tánaiste is giving him carte blanche. That is essentially what he said in his reply. I asked a simple question. Was what the Minister did right or wrong? The Tánaiste just about said it was. He used the most popular phrase emanating from Ministers right now, which is "context". The context is clear. Whether one agrees with Deputies Wallace, Clare Daly and others, what has happened since the penalty points issue was first raised has not been pretty. The Tánaiste described it as a "bad episode". One Deputy was handcuffed and ended up in a prison cell. I am uncomfortable about that, irrespective of whether people are uncomfortable about the issues raised by the Deputies. I am uncomfortable about the fact that people who might be annoying Ministers are being undermined and so on.

The Deputy is over time. Would he mind putting a supplementary question?

I do not know the reasons, but it should be very clear that no Minister should have done what the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, did. I think in his heart the Tánaiste knows that, but he seems to be incapable of saying so.

The Minister has dealt with this issue in the House. As happens when an issue such as this arises, a Minister comes into the House, makes a statement and takes questions. In this case, the Minister said he was sorry and the Deputy should accept this. Of course, there are issues which arise. There are issues about gardaí exercising common sense in the handling of road traffic offences. It is appropriate that they are enabled to continue to do this-----

I accept that.

-----and also in the context of fixed penalty charges. The Minister has made it very clear that there is no question of him or the Garda Síochána keeping tabs on Members of this House or of him or anybody in the Government keeping tabs on political opponents. There is an issue in regard to privacy which probably requires a longer and wider discussion. Perhaps it is an issue which might be addressed by an Oireachtas committee because the issues with which the Garda Síochána is dealing should not come into the public domain, unless there is an actual charge, either through the media or in any other way.

The bottom line is that the Minister made a statement to the House on the issue; he said he was sorry and, in respect of how he had come into possession of the information, he explained this and the rationale for it.

Was he right?