That is the point. It goes back to February, which was when the request relating to the need to fill the vacancy came.
On prevailing side: this member voted with the winning side in 509 of 516 decisive votes (0 abstentions excluded). Read it as a government-or-opposition indicator rather than a measure of influence — the figure is near 100% for members supporting the government of the day and near 0% for those opposing it.
This is the point of the site: contributions keep the party held on the day, not the one held now.
| Party | Recorded as | Contributions | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| FF | Fianna Fáil | 19,180 | 2020-02-20 – 2026-09-30 |
Membership spells on record: FF 1989-06-15–1992-11-05 · FF 1992-11-25–1997-05-15 · FF 1997-06-06–2002-04-25 · FF 2002-05-17–2007-04-30 · FF 2007-05-24–2011-02-01 · FF 2011-02-25–2016-03-09 · FF 2016-03-10–2020-01-14 · FF 2020-02-08–2024-11-08 · FF 2024-11-29–present
That is the point. It goes back to February, which was when the request relating to the need to fill the vacancy came.
On 9 March last, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board met. That was long before any negotiations to form a Government.
The board recommended Séamus Woulfe. Those are the facts.
That is the only context. I was not embroiling myself-----
As far as I am concerned, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, which is chaired by the Chief Justice-----
I was making the point, in answer to the questions and the assertions made, that the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board is chaired by the Chief Justice.
It has the presidents of the four courts involved-----
-----and members of the Law Society as well. That is what I did not ignore-----
I accepted the board's recommendation as to the suitability of Mr. Justice Woulfe. That is the point from my perspective. I had no interest-----
-----in embroiling myself in the politics of this-----
-----good, bad or indifferent. When it came to the Government, once it was established, to ratify that, that is the context in which I ratified it.
I have answered that repeatedly. In the context of other judges indicating their interest, that has been answered. That goes to the Attorney General of the day and the Minister for Justice.
The Minister for Justice then brings to the Cabinet the name of the nominee for appointment.
That has always been the position. It has always been consistently the position that one name comes to the Cabinet from the Minister for Justice.
The Minister for Justice will answer questions in the House on this issue and that has been made clear by the Minister.
The Tánaiste also has answered questions on this on a consistent basis.
What was not factual in what I said?
I said the board recommended him as a suitable candidate.
The Minister did offer to come to the House next Tuesday to answer-----
Hold on a second, I did not interrupt anybody. The basic point is this. The Minister offered to come to the House next Tuesday to answer questions on this issue and the Minister was refused.