On this motion of confidence put down by the Government, which arose directly as a result of Fine Gael putting down a motion of no confidence in the Government, one would have to have regard to the manner in which the Government addressed the issue. Over the last few days one could not but be surprised at the manner in which some Government spokespersons addressed the issue in hand and, far from enhancing any public confidence in Government, they went the other way. Speaker after speaker seemed to have decided to dig down deep in the hope of eventually striking something which was akin to oil but not of the same texture and have repeatedly attempted to throw mud across the House in the hope that the whole purpose of the exercise on the motion of confidence in the Government would be lost.
This was capped entirely this morning by Deputy Roche who probably saw himself as a latter day Sherlock Holmes, having spent a considerable amount of time, laboriously digging into the archives to find something which he could hurl across the floor in the hope that somebody somewhere might decide that it was in some way unethical. He probably landed himself with the tag, not of Sherlock Holmes but of Inspector Closeau, who used to be portrayed by the late Peter Sellers and who did not necessarily always come up with the result he desired. I think he also resembled the boy at school whom the teacher had ignored for some time and who hoped if, perhaps, he was able to bring in sufficient apples or goodies he would be noticed when the next round [906] of promotions came up. I am sorry to say he failed miserably and only exposed himself as a very small minded, bitter and disappointed person.
The motion we are now discussing stems from more than the issues that have been debated publicly over the last number of weeks. It stems also from public confidence, the confidence of the people in Government and the confidence of business in Government. The question has already been referred to by my colleague Deputy Garret FitzGerald, that in a recent poll public confidence in Government is waning, and is waning fast for a number of reasons. It would appear that Government are told what to do on a regular basis by some people who are actually outside of this House. That is not something that would enhance public confidence. The other thing that has occurred again and again over the last couple of years in the life of this Government is that at every sign of a crisis there has been a meeting within the two camps of Government and there has been a crisis within a crisis where one has said they will, they will not, maybe, perhaps. That is the story of this Administration over the last couple of years. There is no indication that they will continue in any different fashion from that which has prevailed for the last couple of years. The suggestion of no confidence is well founded, as there has been an abysmal failure from that side of the House to engender any kind of confidence into the debate or to encourage pubic following of their particular parties.
In the short time available to me I would like to refer to one issue which is of major importance in ensuring that State and semi-State companies and business generally are accountable so far as they can be to this House but with particular reference to the State and semi-State companies. How often have we put down parliamentary questions in this House to be told, on the one hand, that they are to be transferred from one Minister or [907] another or, on the other, that the Minister has no official responsibily to the House? This is not a reference to the Ceann Comhairle's office, it is an accepted practice and a wrong practice in my view. How else can public representatives be answerable to our constituents unless we have the right to put down parliamentary questions asking about any issue under the sun which is pertinent to a particular Minister's responsibility? A Minister may consider himself - or herself, as the case may be - glib and smart, though I wish to state emphatically that this does not apply to all Ministers. There are some Ministers who are particularly good and forthright in answering questions. There are others, unfortunately, who will use that escape clause again and again to get away from answering directly. The one thing that always happens to such people is that they get caught themselves. If they do not seek the information in order to accommodate the Opposition, the particular individuals in the Departments concerned fully recognise that they will never be questioned anywhere.
In my opinion the fault is with the inability or the unwillingness of some Ministers to give clear answers to specific questions in this House. If they could mend their ways in that direction it would be a great help to this House and would be of greater assistance to themselves and of far greater assistance in encouraging public confidence in Government.


