TÁNAISTE EAMON Gilmore reiterated his confidence in Minister for Health James Reilly as Sinn Féin claimed the Fine Gael deputy leader had not dispelled concerns about a conflict of interest over his investment in a nursing home property.
Mr Gilmore said he had confidence in Dr Reilly and accepted his personal statement made to the Dáil on Wednesday explaining the circumstances that led to him being named in a list of debt defaulters.
He was responding to Sinn Féin justice spokesman Jonathan O’Brien, who asked if he had “full confidence in a Minister for Health who is in breach of a High Court order”.
“Yes, I have confidence in the Minister for Health,” The Tánaiste replied, “as I do in all of the Ministers who serve in this Government.”
During Leaders’ Questions, Mr O’Brien said Dr Reilly had given no indication as to when he would comply with the High Court order for the repayment of €1.9 million to other investors in a property in Carrick-on-Suir, Co Tipperary, where a nursing home is located.
He also accused Dr Reilly of contradicting his own register of interests as a TD because his declaration to the Standards in Public Office Commission (Sipo) stated he transferred his nursing home interest to a blind trust.
“Yet we now know from the Minister’s own mouth last night that that declaration was untrue.”
Ceann comhairle Seán Barrett said the Dáil was not a court of law and warned the Cork TD: “You cannot accuse him of improper behaviour during any parliamentary question” or make an allegation against the Minister when he was not there to defend himself.
Mr O’Brien said it appeared from the Minister’s statement that he was in breach of Sipo guidelines from when he took office in March 2011 until January 12th.
He also claimed Dr Reilly had not dispelled concerns about his conflict of interest in having an interest in a nursing home property while “presiding over hundreds of bed closures in the public nursing sector”.
Mr Gilmore said the Minister made a statement and he accepted that statement. There were procedures for members of the House having private business interests and a requirement that they do not take an active involvement in that business and put it at arm’s length.
The Tánaiste said Dr Reilly had explained how he had done that and that he had sought the advice of the commission, which was the correct thing to do.
Mr O’Brien said: “The facts are that the Minister is attempting to sell his share in a private for-profit nursing home at the same time when the decisions he’s making are resulting in the closure of public nursing home beds which will have an impact on that share.”
He asked: “Tánaiste, do you still have full confidence in a Minister who is in breach of a High Court order?”
Mr Gilmore said: “You can’t have it both ways. You can’t on the one hand say he has a conflict of interest and on the order say he is disposing of the interest he has in the property concerned.”
He said Dr Reilly informed the House of the efforts he had made to dispose of his interest in the property concerned.
