Our overriding consideration is to vindicate the integrity of Maurice McCabe and to have a comprehensive statutory tribunal of inquiry into allegations that there was a concerted smear campaign against him. That said, truth in government matters. There has been a drip-drip of information and misinformation and a lack of candid presentation of what exactly happened in the lead up to the Cabinet meeting to discuss the formation of the commission of investigation and, indeed, the revelations of the existence of a Tusla file containing false allegations against Maurice McCabe.

I was taken by the Taoiseach's interview this week where he said the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Katherine Zappone, told him she intended to meet Sergeant McCabe in a private capacity and that was all he knew. He apologised for that yesterday and said it did not happen. The Taoiseach said her adviser spoke to his adviser on 24 January in accordance with Deputy Zappone's speech to the Dáil last night, which was candid and probably a model others should follow. She said:

My adviser met an adviser from the Taoiseach's office on Tuesday, 24 January, the day before I was due to meet Sergeant and Mrs. McCabe, and told him about the upcoming meeting. She told him that it was in respect of a complaint that the McCabes had about Tusla. Before meeting the McCabes, I told the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality that I was meeting Sergeant and Mrs. McCabe. As I stated when I spoke to the media yesterday, I also spoke with the Taoiseach prior to the Cabinet meeting last week. Just to be clear, this was after my meeting with the McCabes. I told him that I had met the McCabes and that we had discussed false allegations of sexual abuse made against Sergeant McCabe to Tusla. The Taoiseach said that this would be covered by the commission of investigation, which is what we were calling it at the time. I did not go into the detail of any of the allegations that I was aware of, but I did indicate to him that this was the nature of the conversation.

When the Taoiseach rang me the night before yesterday, he indicated that he did not know about the existence of a Tusla file. He said that to me. He said he did not know about the details contained in the file. I am beginning to accept that the Taoiseach did not know the exact graphic details of the file, but it seems clear that he knew about the existence of a Tusla file. How else did he know or could he have known that the commission of investigation would cover the allegations if he knew nothing about the allegations themselves? He told me that Deputy Zappone said there were allegations against Maurice McCabe although he did not mention Tusla. The Taoiseach told me he asked if they were true or false and the Minister told him they were false. I would like to know how the Taoiseach knew the commission would cover it if he did not know the detail of any allegations.

Can the Taoiseach or someone else confirm to the House whether Department of Justice and Equality officials knew about the existence of the Tusla file and the allegations contained in it? Was there an attempt to keep the protected disclosures report and its conclusions separate from the existence of the Tusla file and the allegations in that? Was the Cabinet blindsided as a result of the desire on behalf of somebody to keep the two separate at the cusp of the establishment of the commission of investigation?

I thank Deputy Micheál Martin. I do not know the answer to the last question he asked, as to whether the Department of Justice and Equality knew of the existence of a Tusla file.

Can the Taoiseach find out because the Minister for Justice and Equality has-----

The Minister for Justice and Equality is looking at the question of terms of reference for the inquiry, and whether it is possible to extend it to cater for other whistleblowers or whatever.

In respect of the Deputy's question, he has outlined the sequence of events. On 24 January, one of the officials in the office of the Minister, Deputy Zappone, told my office that she intended to meet Sergeant McCabe and that was relayed to me. On 7 February, in a brief informal conversation as the Cabinet meeting of that day was about to commence, the Minister, Deputy Zappone, mentioned to me that she had met Sergeant McCabe about false allegations of sexual abuse that had been made about him to Tusla. She did not go into the details of that conversation with Sergeant and Mrs McCabe or the gross mishandling of the issue with Tusla.

It is absolutely clear to me that allegations of a false nature would be fully covered by Mr. Justice O'Neill's draft terms of reference as allegations of criminal misconduct against Sergeant McCabe and are at the core of the proposed commission's remit. That was confirmed by Mr. Justice Charleton, who said all of the allegations revealed in the "Prime Time" programme are, in fact, covered by the original draft terms of reference. Paragraph (b) refers to the fact the protected disclosure sent in by Superintendent Taylor refers directly to an allegation of criminal misconduct made against Sergeant McCabe and this was the root cause of his agenda.

Clearly, we were looking at the terms of reference, we had examined the terms of reference and they were produced and presented by Mr. Justice O'Neill. Central to that was an allegation of criminal misconduct made against Sergeant McCabe. Obviously, the discussion between the Minister and Sergeant McCabe dealt with that area. The Minister did not make me aware of the existence of a Tusla file and did not comment in any detail on the conversation she had with Sergeant McCabe.

How did the Taoiseach know then that the commission would cover it? Mr. Justice Charleton's conclusion is retrospective. The Taoiseach did not know the detail of the allegations in the Tusla file at the time. Therefore, it begs the question as to how anybody in the Cabinet knew it would cover the Tusla file and the allegations contained within it. The Minister, Deputy Zappone, said she would have appreciated if there was advance circulation of memorandums.

I deduced from this that the protected disclosure memorandum was never circulated to other Cabinet Ministers in advance. The Taoiseach can correct me if I am wrong. Therefore, it begs the question as to how anybody knew. It seems an extraordinary display of Cabinet telepathy at work that each individual Minister deduced individually that this was somehow going to cover something that nobody knew anything about other than, allegedly, the Minister, Deputy Zappone, in terms of the detail and content of the allegations contained in the Tusla file. As we now know, they were false allegations against Maurice McCabe.

A question was asked yesterday and a very straightforward answer can come from the Department of Justice and Equality and the Minister for Justice and Equality. Did the Secretary General of the Department of Justice and Equality or senior officials in the Department know about the existence of the Tusla file and the allegations within it before they circulated or sent a memorandum, via the Minister, on the protected disclosure to the Cabinet? This is very important. We should get a clear "Yes" or "No" answer on whether they did because the truth will come out at some stage. We need a candid explanation in order to explain the background.

I do not know the answer to that question. In the very brief conversation I had with the Minister, Deputy Zappone, she pointed out that she had met Sergeant McCabe. I corrected the record yesterday on that and acknowledge that I was mistaken in my account of the sequence of contacts with the Minister, Deputy Zappone. She spoke to me just before the Cabinet meeting began. She did say that she met Sergeant McCabe and discussed questions of false allegations of a sexual nature made to Tusla against him.

The Cabinet was just about to consider the terms of reference which I had read. Clearly, the central issue is whether a smear campaign was directed by senior gardaí against Sergeant McCabe. The question is referred to directly in the case of criminal misconduct allegations made against Sergeant McCabe in the terms of reference drafted by Mr. Justice O'Neill which Mr. Justice Charleton later said fully covered the implications of that and all of the issues that were portrayed in the "Prime Time" programme.

Sinn Féin has tabled a motion of no confidence in the Government and we call on all Teachtaí to support it. Some in Fianna Fáil, in particular, said we should not have tabled the motion and claim that it will prevent the McCabe family from getting answers to their very legitimate questions. That is nonsense. It is the behaviour of the current and previous Governments that prevent this.

For his part, the Taoiseach has put forward a motion of confidence which states: "Dáil Éireann reaffirms its confidence in the Government". That motion has only one signature, that of the Taoiseach. How could that be? Could the Taoiseach not get the support of anyone else in Fine Gael or the so-called Independents in government? Could he not get a dig out from his friends and partners in Fianna Fáil?

Deputy Billy Kelleher was gushing in his admiration of the Government today. He said he wanted to ensure that the Government survives. Why would any sensible and caring person want an incoherent, incompetent and shambolic Government to survive? Does Fianna Fáil not know what is happening in the health service or about the emergency in housing and homelessness? Does Fianna Fáil think the Government is fit for the challenges presented by Brexit? Does it forget that at the heart of the current controversy is an alleged criminal conspiracy by senior gardaí to destroy the character of a decent man doing his duty?

Yesterday, the Taoiseach told me it was irrelevant when he became aware of the false accusations against Sergeant McCabe. It is totally relevant. The Taoiseach keeps changing his story because he knows that. It seems to me that he has known for a very long time. The Taoiseach will clearly not want to answer my question and may wish to attack me personally. He can do so again and again, as part of his mock feigned anger, but that will not get anyone, in particular the McCabe family, any answers.

Having previously denied it, the Taoiseach now admits that the Minister, Deputy Zappone, told him that false accusations made against Maurice McCabe were referred to Tusla. He said he told her that would be covered by the terms of the commission of investigation. The terms of reference were drawn up by Mr. Justice O'Neill, who read the two protected disclosures. Unless the Taoiseach had seen the disclosures, he would have had no way of knowing that the false accusations brought to him by the Minister, Deputy Zappone, were the false accusations contained in the protected disclosure. Was the Taoiseach aware of the content of these disclosures?

No, I was not. I did not see them, I was not entitled legally to inquire about them and I did not know the detail of what was enclosed in the two protected disclosures and nor did anyone else at the Cabinet table, except the Minister for Justice and Equality, who received them. I did know that in the terms of reference the question of allegations of criminal misconduct were central to the setting up of the inquiry and its work, as was the commission of investigation proposed at the time.

"Criminal misconduct" could mean anything at all. The Taoiseach stated that he did not know the content of those protected disclosures, but he has to say that because it would be unlawful for him to have knowledge of them. The terms of reference are clear and would not have covered the allegations brought to the Taoiseach by the Minister, Deputy Zappone, unless they were the same allegations made by Superintendent David Taylor in his protected disclosure. How could the Taoiseach have known that they were the same allegations when he gave such an assurance to the Minister, Deputy Zappone, unless he had knowledge of the protected disclosures? Let me remind the Taoiseach that this was before the judge confirmed they were the same allegations. The Taoiseach may wish to tell me that the question is irrelevant or, as I said, he may wish to attack me again. However, this question is totally and absolutely relevant. That is why the Taoiseach's motion of confidence in the Government should be rejected by the Dáil and why he should give us a definitive, definite and conclusive answer to this totally relevant question. When did he first become aware of the false allegation against Maurice McCabe and, on the related issue, did he see the protected disclosure?

I confirm to Deputy Adams that I did not see the protected disclosures. I did not read them. By law, I am prevented from even asking questions about the protected disclosures-----

Was the Taoiseach briefed on them?

-----as is the Minister for Justice and Equality prevented from speaking about them. I was entitled to read and assess and analyse the terms of reference set out by Mr. Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill, who had contact with all of the main personnel, I am sure, in respect of the two protected disclosures that he received. In my very brief conversation with the Minister, Deputy Zappone, she quite rightly pointed out to me that she had met Sergeant McCabe and that the subject of her conversation with him was false allegations of a sexual nature made to Tusla about him. These terms of reference speak specifically about an allegation of criminal misconduct made against Sergeant McCabe. I was clear in my mind that it covered and would cover false allegations of sexual misconduct. This was confirmed by the judge of the Supreme Court who was to take charge of the then proposed private commission of investigation and it also included all of the issues on the RTE programme.

I did not ask if the Taoiseach read them. I asked if he was aware of them. He did not answer that question.