Skip to content
PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

Ireland · Question · written

PQ 154

154. Deputy Alan Kelly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if and the number of times he discussed or communicated with the current Taoiseach, before or after his appointment to that office, the filling of the Supreme Court vacancy occasioned by the retirement of a person (details supplied) and the interest of the former Attorney General in appointment to that position; if he indicated his own preference in relation to the matter; if so, if he sought and secured the current Taoiseach’s agreement; the nature of any such discussions or communications; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40866/20]

askedIreland· Dáil Éireann· EN

Introduced

3 December 2020

Last action

Status

written

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

3 December 2020

Summary

154. Deputy Alan Kelly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if and the number of times he discussed or communicated with the current Taoiseach, before or after his appointment to that office, the filling of the Supreme Court vacancy occasioned by the retirement of a person (details supplied) and the interest of the former Attorney General in appointment to that position; if he indicated his own preference in relation to the matter; if so, if he sought and secured the current Taoiseach’s agreement; the nature of any such discussions or communications; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40866/20]

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

1 official file

Judicial Appointments

View fileDownload file

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.