I have been reluctant to raise the matter of the Minister, Deputy Cowen, on Leaders' Questions before today. I absolutely accept that everybody makes mistakes, that people learn from those mistakes and that they move on. We wanted to give the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine every opportunity to address all of the matters concerned, to draw a line under them and to move on at a time of huge health and economic challenges, not least for the farming community. Last week, the Minister had the opportunity to do just that by putting all of the facts on the record of the Dáil in relation to his drink-driving incident but, unfortunately, he has failed to do that.

We now have an unprecedented situation where a Minister is disputing the Garda PULSE record of a drink-driving offence he was involved in and looking to have that record changed. Last week in his personal statement, the Minister stated he was "conscious that a constant drip feed of new information can be damaging and destabilising". He said it was for that reason he had conducted a full examination of all records that he could obtain. Yet here we are a week later and the drip feed of new information continues.

On 4 July, according to The Sunday Times, contact was made with the Minister regarding the Garda record from 18 September 2016, stating that he sought to evade a Garda checkpoint on the evening of the drink-driving offence. The Irish Times today quotes sources saying the Taoiseach was made aware of these records at the time of this media query, that is, the weekend before last. Can the Taoiseach confirm when he was made aware of the Garda record of the Minister's attempt to evade a Garda checkpoint? Was he aware of this before the Minister made his statement to the Dáil? Did the Minister discuss with the Taoiseach or seek advice from the Taoiseach regarding his decision to seek to amend the record relating to his 2016 drink-driving conviction? Does the Taoiseach accept that the Minister's statement to the Dáil was incomplete, as it made no mention of this Garda record? When did the Taoiseach inform his coalition partners about all of this? Has he challenged the Minister on his incomplete statement? Does he accept that a Minister challenging the accuracy or, indeed, the truthfulness of a Garda PULSE record is a very serious matter?

As the Deputy said, the Minister came into the Dáil and publicly admitted that he was convicted of a drink-driving offence four years ago, that he was penalised for that offence and that justice was meted out in accordance with the charge and with the offence that he committed. He adamantly denies any suggestion or implication that he sought to evade any checkpoint. That is his very strong position. He is very concerned that data related to his personal files have found their way to others and he feels that is a very serious issue.

Irrespective of what side of the House we come from and irrespective of the issue here, that is an issue that will have to be dealt with at some stage. I am aware that the Garda Commissioner has referred the issue to the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC, and it is one we cannot ignore. I am not apportioning blame anywhere here, because I do not know how that material left the PULSE file and ended up with various media outlets or others. I do not know how that process happened.

I spoke to the Minister, Deputy Cowen, the weekend before last and he adamantly denied any suggestion or implication that he would have evaded or attempted to avoid a checkpoint. At that stage, when someone says I was told, I believe a newspaper says it told my chief of staff or gave information to my chief of staff, but I cannot work on the basis of the sources of the media. I cannot verify without seeing the document myself. I had a lengthy conversation last evening with the Minister. Early this morning, with the Minister's permission, I saw the actual document.

The Minister has made it very clear to me that he wants to pursue both issues through the mechanisms that are available to him to pursue them. First, under the data protection process and by way of the Data Protection Commission, he is entitled to seek a correction of that particular record insofar as he believes that it does not accurately convey what transpired or that implications can be taken from it which may not necessarily be the case. He is pursuing that. Second, he feels the entire issue has become public because of what he sees as illegal procurement of the information. We now know that is being investigated. The Minister feels his rights have been transgressed and undermined in that regard and he believes he is entitled to due process in respect of both issues. He has pointed out to me that when it was first put to him - I think it was by a reporter or the media - he was very taken aback by the suggestion that he had turned away from a checkpoint. He was very adamant about that to me. That is why he said there was no issue made of it at the time, there was no reference to it at the time and he wants to seek to correct that aspect of it. In that context, he was clear to me that he wants to pursue his legal rights and entitlements in that respect.

I have kept both my colleagues in government, namely, the Tánaiste, Deputy Varadkar, and the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Eamon Ryan, fully up to date in regard to my conversations with the Minister, Deputy Cowen, and in respect of the fact that I have seen the Garda file. I am not at liberty to disclose it because it is not my property and it was shared with me in that context. That is the up-to-date position.

It is becoming clear that the Minister, Deputy Cowen, will have to come before the House and take questions on all of these issues. However, for the purposes of today's discussion, I am more concerned with what the Taoiseach, as Head of Government, knew. He has confirmed that he did, in fact, know about the Garda PULSE record and that there was an allegation that the Minister had sought to evade a Garda checkpoint. He has confirmed that he knew that information as or before the Minister was making his statement. I find it extraordinary that the Taoiseach would stand over a Minister who has made an incomplete statement to the Dáil on a matter of this importance. Were the Taoiseach's coalition partners, the leaders of Fine Gael and the Green Party, aware of the PULSE record and the allegation that the Minister had evaded a Garda checkpoint at the time the Minister, Deputy Cowen, made his statement? The Taoiseach said he has had a conversation with the Minister, but the Taoiseach did not indicate that he challenged the Minister on the fact that his statement was incomplete.

I accept the Minister's point on data protection. That matter should be investigated by the appropriate authorities but it is not the net point here. The net point is that a Minister is now contradicting a Garda record. He came before the House to make what was to be a complete, no-holds-barred statement on all the material matters and did not state that this Garda PULSE record existed and that an allegation had been made that he had sought to evade a Garda checkpoint. That is absolutely extraordinary. It is even more extraordinary that the Taoiseach, as the Head of Government, would accept that. Do the Taoiseach's coalition partners similarly accept that the Minister was right to come before the House and not give us all the information? Do they also accept that he is right to challenge the Garda PULSE record? It is extraordinary that a Minister is now openly contradicting the PULSE records. This is not just about Deputy Cowen, because we all must rely on the truthfulness and accuracy of PULSE records. The Minister has brought that accuracy into question but he has also failed to give a full account of events on that night. The Taoiseach was aware that there was another twist in the tale and yet it seems he has not challenged the Minister on it. Does he believe in full and frank statements to this House, or does he not?

The Deputy has drawn two wrong inferences and made two incorrect assertions. I was not aware of the PULSE record and did not see it. I cannot work on the basis of a journalist saying that he or she has a source or paper that shows X. I saw the document myself this morning and having seen it, I can say that it is not quite as it has been portrayed. Nonetheless, the document is there.

Then publish it.

It is not for me to publish.

Then the Taoiseach should have the Minister publish it.

The Deputy should let the Taoiseach finish.

It is not my record and people have entitlements in this regard.

The Deputy should not make suggestions that are untrue. The Minister, Deputy Cowen, was unaware of the record and exactly what it said until he got possession of it. One can only comment on a record when one sees it. For the last four years, he was unaware of any suggestion that this would be on the record. That is his point of view. I would not pre-emptively judge something until I saw the record for myself, and I did early this morning. The Minister contacted the Garda during the week to get possession of the record because he did not have it. Others had it before he did and that is also an issue for any individual in such a situation. As regards his contribution to the House, he did not yet have the document and did not want to incriminate himself in relation to it. All I can convey to the Deputy is that he has very serious concerns about how the whole thing has developed and how his own personal information was procured or disseminated from the PULSE record.

I thank the Taoiseach. We are a little over time.

That is an issue about which he is extremely angry.

I call Deputy Fitzpatrick.