There is an astonishing story in The Irish Times today on which we urgently need further information. It transpires the Attorney General, Paul Gallagher, has been carrying on private legal work since he was appointed by the Government in June 2020. According to the article, Mr. Gallagher is acting for the former directors of Independent News & Media, INM, now known as Mediahuis Ireland, after INM was taken over by a Belgian company, in their dealings with High Court inspectors who are investigating the company. What makes this even more bizarre is the High Court inspectors were appointed on foot of an investigation that is under way into the company by the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, the State's white-collar crime watchdog. We have the Attorney General, the State's top lawyer, acting for a number of former company directors of one of the biggest media companies in the country in a case which emanated from an inquiry by the State's corporate watchdog. You could not make it up.

It has also been reported that one of Mr. Gallagher's clients is a current board member of Mediahuis. It really is quite extraordinary. The Irish Times article stated Mr. Gallagher is acting in the case in a private capacity. I do not know how that works. Is he Attorney General by day and a more ordinary barrister by night? Mr. Gallagher cannot simply take off his Attorney General's hat, leave it at the door and enter the room as a different persona. His office carries weight, power, authority, and responsibility, not to mention obligations that cannot just be shrugged off whenever it is expedient to do so. On what planet was it felt that it was appropriate to do so, especially given the case is the most high-profile investigation currently being undertaken by the ODCE? The conflict of interest here is just stunning, and multilayered.

There is the obvious conflict of the Attorney General being involved in a case in which the State is on the other side. Apparently, Mr. Gallagher sought and received Government approval to carry on his private legal work. Who exactly authorised this? Was it a decision by the Taoiseach or a Cabinet decision? Is there a record of it? Who provided the legal advice to whoever made this decision? Was the Tánaiste aware of it?

Incredibly, we do not know if this is the only case the Attorney General is involved in. There could well be others. We need clarity on that today. How many private legal cases is the Attorney General acting in, and who exactly are his clients? There are strict rules when it comes to civil servants, in particular senior civil servants, engaging in private work. Were those rules followed by the Attorney General? Like Deputies and Senators, the Attorney General has to fill out a statement of interests that is lodged with the Standards in Public Office Commission, SIPO.

I thank the Deputy.

Was his private work included in this statement?

Of further huge importance is that the Attorney General's office instructs barristers for State work, which is often quite lucrative. Does the Tánaiste accept therefore that it is grossly inappropriate that the Attorney General would be engaged in private work? How would a barrister feel upon learning the opposing counsel is the Attorney General, whose office can make or break careers?

The Deputy is over time.

Does the Tánaiste see that there are serious problems with this?

There are salient rulings in this area of allegations against the Attorney General. Although I am conscious that the matter the Deputy raises has been in the media, we should proceed with great care in terms of what we have to say here.

The Attorney General is finishing out a number of cases which he had taken on prior to his appointment as Attorney General to this Government. That is not unprecedented. I understand it has happened in the past with former Attorneys General, that they are allowed to finish out cases that they were involved in prior to their appointment. It is something the party leaders and the Cabinet were aware of in a general sense at the time of his appointment, but obviously not the detail of any particular cases.

The ODCE is an office of my Department. Taking that into account, it would be most inappropriate for me to comment on any particular case. I appreciate that Deputy Shortall is not asking me to do so, but I wanted to put that on the record of the House.

The Deputy has asked a number of detailed questions, which are reasonable questions, about the Attorney General's legal practice, but they are not questions to which I have the answers. I am not accountable to the Dáil for such matters, but they are reasonable questions, and I will endeavour to see if we can find answers for the Deputy sooner rather than later.

Does the Tánaiste accept that there is a huge potential conflict of interest here? It is news to me, and probably to other people, that there have been other such cases. What about the previous period when Mr. Gallagher was the Attorney General? Did he carry on private work at that stage?

Will the Tánaiste be a bit more specific about how this decision was reached? Was it a Cabinet decision? Was it recorded, and who provided the legal advice on it? The Tánaiste said he does not have the detail on this. Surely Mr. Gallagher would have been asked to provide that detail. Is it recorded somewhere?

I accept there are some questions the Tánaiste cannot answer here and now, but will he give a commitment, in light of the seriousness of this situation, to come back to me today with all of those replies?

I am absolutely certain the Attorney General will be very careful to avoid any conflict of interest or any perception of that. He is a person of the highest integrity and ability and I have full confidence he will make sure there is no conflict of interest.

I will endeavour to find answers to the Deputy's questions as soon as I can. I cannot promise it will be today. I do not know if a formal Cabinet decision on the matter was recorded or if there was legal advice, but what I can say is the party leaders and the Cabinet were informed that the Attorney General would be finishing out some cases he had taken on before his appointment as Attorney General.