Sticking with the issue of the Attorney General, given that the Tánaiste was not provided with details of other private cases that Mr. Gallagher was involved in, how can he possibly state that there would not be a conflict of interest? This type of situation arises regularly for barristers, and the standard approach is for them to hand over a case to a colleague. That happens commonly. One has to wonder why a case such as the one in question, which involves the State's corporate watchdog investigating the largest media company, was not handed over. Given that the Tánaiste was part of the decision, will he tell the House whether the retention of private work was a condition of Mr. Gallagher's accepting the role of Attorney General?

Once again, I wish to state clearly on the record of the House that I am confident that the Attorney General will avoid any conflict of interest. As I said earlier, he is a man of the highest integrity and I am confident he will avoid any such conflict.

The Tánaiste cannot really say that, though.

I am not aware of the detail of any particular case in which he is involved. I am certainly not aware of any agreement made prior to his appointment of the nature the Deputy mentioned.