The document had been agreed and engagement with the IMO had concluded. The salient details, including financial information and all the commercially sensitive aspects of it, were published. I gave the House the IMO statement from 4 April. The document was launched by the HSE on 5 April. On 6 April, it was welcomed at an event by me and the Minister, Deputy Harris. The full text of it was not published but all of the information - all the salient and financial information - was in the public domain and was being di…

It was a confidential document and one that I shared on a confidential basis with somebody who was the president of the NAGP, a GP organisation, for the reasons I explained. It was going to be up to every individual GP to decide whether he or she wanted to sign up to this. We were in that space where the deal had been done and we were now trying to get as many people as possible to sign up to it. My motivation was to show to the individual in question that this was a good deal that should not be opposed or agitated…

As I said before, this was not the right way to do it. I can totally understand why some people in the IMO may feel that their confidence was broken. I know some have been critical for that reason over the past couple of days. That is why I have apologised for that today and that is why I have accepted that I should have done this in a different way. Equally, however, there have been other people in the IMO who have said that they believe this is a non-story, that the document was far from confidential, that it was…

It is important to restate that negotiations were concluded on 3 April. If it had been before that, we would be talking about a very different situation. The negotiations were concluded on 3 April. That is what it says in the memorandum the then Minister for Health brought to Cabinet on 9 April. The salient details, including the financial information and the commercially sensitive aspects, were all announced on 4 April. I will give the Deputy the view of one member of the IMO council. He said that in the week the …

-----and phoning dozens of GPs to promote the deal, the details of which were widely known by hundreds of GPs, and that the fact that the NAGP did not know shows its amateurism. That is one view.

To my recollection, I did not but, as I said, the negotiations had concluded at this stage. If we had got into a real battle about trying to get GPs to sign up, a repeat of 2015, the then Minister, Deputy Harris, and I would have many conversations about it. The fact, however, is that things had moved on. Things move on very quickly in politics, particularly in the Department of Health. There is never a time in the Department of Health when there are not at least two other houses on fire. The kind of thing we were …

I explained my motivation. My only motivation was-----

I wanted the president of the NAGP to see, on a confidential basis, or a secret basis if the Deputy wants to use that term, that this was a good agreement, that there was nothing in it that had not been substantially announced publicly and that there was no reason for that organisation to oppose or agitate against it as it had in 2015. I wanted to do that confidentially, which is why I used the informal communication channel that we had. I accept that was not the right way to do it.

All I can give the Deputy is the explanation I have given as to why I did this. I wanted to keep it confidential. We had an informal communications channel. I hoped he would see it, read it and understand that what I was telling him was true, which was that everything of interest had already been published and that there was nothing in it which was contrary to what was in the public domain. I wanted the NAGP not to oppose the agreement. As it happens, it did not. Events moved on very quickly and that organisation f…

I have not leaked anything of this nature. It depends on what the Deputy means. I do not believe I have leaked confidential Cabinet information but, let us be honest about it, there is not a person in this House who does not speak to journalists off the record. I have not leaked confidential Cabinet information, no.

I have not leaked confidential information.

I appreciate the Deputy is entitled to make that statement although, obviously, I do not agree with it. Fianna Fáil and the Green Party are not involved in this. It happened in 2019, during the term of the previous Government. I do not believe they should be held to account for this in any way. This is something I did and for which I take responsibility.

He has made no such demands of me. That is not the way we operate. We are getting to know each other well and are working well together. I make no demands of him and he makes no demands of me. With regard to the Regulation of Lobbying Act, under that Act the person carrying out the lobbying is responsible for registering that activity. As a Deputy, Deputy Mattie McGrath is lobbied all the time but he has no responsibility to register it. I imagine he never does or never has. The responsibility for doing so is on th…

I thank the Deputy. First, I do not. Second, the premise of the Deputy's question seems to suggest that in some way I sought the head of Deputy Cowen or Deputy Calleary but I absolutely did not. The case of Deputy Cowen was handled by the leader of Fianna Fáil in the way he thought best. I found out the former Minister, Deputy Calleary, had resigned one morning when I woke up in bed at 8 a.m. The suggestion I had any role in seeking their resignations is just not correct, if it is going around. That is absolutely u…

The Village magazine produced a photograph of us at a Pride march, although I am not sure which one it was. We all know the innuendo here. We all know what it is.

We all know it is a big part of what is in the article and what is online. I know what is being said and it is not true. This is somebody who is not a close friend but is a friend. He is in my wider social circle. I would say we have met twice in the past year - once at a Christmas drinks thing over a year ago and once when six people went out to dinner, and he and I were part of that six. We would be in touch on other things. He is very involved with Covid-19 issues but we do not have the same mind on Covid, by th…

That is not what I am saying at all. I am saying it is not illegal, full stop.

I remember the Deputy raising a question about the primary medical cert and the Supreme Court judgment on that. I endeavoured to look into that and I have done so. I received a written briefing and I was not particularly satisfied by the answer I received. I wanted to know what was being done to solve the problem and that is why I have not yet reverted to the Deputy. The problem needs to be solved. I can give the Deputy an interim reply but it is not what he wants. This is a problem that must be solved.

Regarding the Deputy's remarks, it is important to emphasise again that the negotiations had concluded. Some minor changes were made prior to publication, but none that required a return to Cabinet. It is in the Cabinet memo of 9 April that engagement had concluded with the IMO at that stage. The figure the Deputy used, regarding the potentially sensitive piece of information in respect of €210 million, was in the press release of 4 April. In fact, there was a detailed breakdown of the financial aspects of this agr…

It was not something that was at issue. We had moved on to dealing with other problems and other things Government has to deal with. This was a deal that was done and accepted. I consider it to have been a success for the Government, for Ministers Harris and Donohoe and even for me. We then moved on to the next problem, and in politics there is always a new problem. Ten problems come up at any given time.