The following is a personal statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Ray Burke TD:

"Ceann Comhairle: I have come here to defend my personal integrity, the integrity of my party and of this Government and the honour of this House. I have also come here to reassure the public and, in particular, my constituents, that I have done nothing wrong.

The experience of my 24 years' membership of this House has seasoned me in the way parliamentary politics operate. The dynamics of democratic politics operating at parliamentary level dictate that governments are opposed by oppositions who, in accordance with their function, will avail of every opportunity to make life uncomfortable for the government of the day. I say this without rancour. I have been in opposition myself.

That is the way our system operates. I accept that; if I did not, I would have no business being here. Furthermore, I do not expect that the facts I will present here today will in all cases satisfy everybody. I am, however, making this statement out of respect for the House and for those members of the House who have sought this statement in good faith.

The circumstances which have given rise to the position in which I find myself occurred during the 1989 general election campaign and have already been described in a statement issued by me on August 7th of this year.

With your leave, Ceann Comhairle, I propose to read that statement into the record of this House:

During the last two years I have been the target of a vicious campaign of rumour and innuendo. Since my appointment as Minister for Foreign Affairs, this campaign has intensified. The stories which have appeared in the media in recent weeks are, as one prominent journalist acknowledged in a letter to me last week, "the culmination of a lengthy series of smears" about me.

The story still keeps resurfacing in different shapes and forms and the repeated articles and comments of recent weeks have placed an unacceptable burden on my family and myself. While I resent having to dignify these allegations by responding to them at all, I believe I must now do so.

The facts of the matter are that during the 1989 general election campaign I was visited in my home by Mr Michael Bailey, of Bovale Developments Ltd, and a Mr James Gogarty. Mr Bailey was well known to me, being a resident of north county Dublin and a long-time supporter of Fianna Fail. I had not met Mr Gogarty previously, but he was introduced by Mr Bailey as an executive of Joseph Murphy Structural Engineers Ltd (JMSE). Mr Gogarty told me that JMSE wished to make a political contribution to me and I received from him, in good faith, a sum of £30,000 as a totally unsolicited political contribution. At no time during our meeting were any favours sought or given.

For the record, I have never done any favours for or made any representations to anyone on behalf of JMSE, Michael Bailey, Bovale Developments Ltd or Mr James Gogarty, either before or since 1989.

From what I have read and heard, it seems that the source of the allegations that have been appearing in the media may be Mr James Gogarty. I do not know what motive, if any, Mr Gogarty would have for pursuing such a vendetta against me. I believe, however, that he and his former employers, JMSE, parted in acrimonious circumstances. For the record, if Mr Gogarty is indeed the source of these allegations, then he is the author of a campaign of lies against me.

I have also been the recipient of a number of anonymous threatening letters relating to those allegations. I have turned this correspondence over to the gardai. As regards the most recent newspaper reports, I wish to point out:

1. I received an unsolicited political contribution of £30,000, not £80,000 as reported.

2. The allegation that I received £40,000 from Mr Bailey or Bovale Developments Ltd on that or any other occasion is false.

3. There were three persons present when I received the contribution from Mr Gogarty (i.e. Mr Gogarty himself, Mr Bailey and myself) and not five as reported.

4. There was one JMSE executive present (i.e. Mr Gogarty) and not two or three as variously reported.

I am taking the opportunity to state unequivocally that I have done nothing illegal, unethical or improper. Indeed, I find myself the victim of a campaign of calumny and abuse.

It is totally unacceptable to me that this matter should be allowed to continue in order to fulfil an agenda which has nothing to do with election contributions or any other aspect of reasonable or reasoned political debate in Irish public life.

I wish to make it clear that if any further untruths are published about me, I will take the necessary steps to vindicate my good name and reputation.

I wish to elaborate today on aspects of that statement. My understanding is that the making of this contribution came about as follows:

Mr Gogarty indicated to Mr Bailey that JMSE wished to make a contribution to my election fund. Mr Bailey brought Mr Gogarty to my home and, during a very brief meeting, Mr Gogarty confirmed that JMSE wished to make a political contribution to me. The contribution was entirely in cash. Prior to leaving with Mr Bailey, Mr Gogarty wished me well in the election.

I did not receive £40,000 from Mr Bailey or Bovale Limited on that or on any other occasion. In fact, I did not receive any personal contributions from Mr Bailey either before, during or after the 1989 general election, although I have established that Mr Bailey over the years made a number of contributions to the Fianna Fail organisation in my constituency on occasions such as race nights and so on.

In light of allegations made subsequent to my statement of August 7th last, I wish to confirm that Mr Joseph Murphy jnr of JMSE was not present at my meeting with Mr Gogarty and Mr Bailey. Indeed, I never met Mr Joseph Murphy jnr during or in connection with the 1989 general election campaign. Specifically, Mr Gogarty, who was the managing director of JMSE, was the only executive of that company present.

I wish to confirm that I contributed £10,000 to the Fianna Fail national organisation during that election campaign. In addition I handed over monies totalling approximately £7,000 to my local constituency organisation during the general election campaign in 1989.

The remainder of the political contributions received by me, including the contribution Mr Gogarty gave me during our meeting in my home, were used to cover my personal election campaign and subsequent political expenses. I did not and do not have separate accounts as regards either the election campaign in question or my subsequent political expenditure.

As regards the contribution itself, £30,000 is the largest contribution I have received during any election campaign either before or since 1989.

On the other hand, as of 1989, there had not been any legal limitations since 1963 on the amount a parliamentary candidate could expend on his or her election campaign. Furthermore, political expenditure does not begin or end during election campaigns.

As all members of this House will be aware, the last 25 years have seen a fundamental change in the operation of politics in this country with public representatives or prospective public representatives having to operate ongoing and expensive constituency campaigns and services between and not merely during elections: newspaper advertisements, race nights, community contributions, leaflet drops, clinics and so on.

FOR AS LONG as I have been a member of this House, political parties and individual politicians have actively solicited and accepted political contributions. Neither through legislation or through the standing orders or rules of this House was the soliciting or accepting of such contributions outlawed or discouraged.

Quite clearly, for any candidate or representative to have accepted a political contribution with "strings attached" would have been unethical if not downright illegal. I wish to reiterate that, in the context of this contribution, there was no attempt to attach any strings or to ask for any favours.

And here we come to the nub of this matter. The stories that circulated were not that a politician had been given a contribution, albeit a generous one. Until very recent times, the mere making of a political contribution during an election campaign would not have been news at all. No, the core of this affair, the issue that has led to the Garda investigation and the primary issue that the Taoiseach felt it necessary to investigate prior to nominating me to serve in his Government, is the fact that Mr Gogarty has apparently alleged not only that a political contribution was made to me, but that it was made for some improper purpose.

Any allegation that I have done anything wrong is completely untrue. No favours were done for JMSE, Bovale Ltd, Mr Bailey, Mr Murphy jnr, or Mr Gogarty. Furthermore, notwithstanding what the Sunday Business Post journalist, Mr Frank Connolly, described as "a number of meetings - about 15 hours of discussions" between Mr Gogarty and the investigating Garda superintendent and the fact that Mr Gogarty was offered immunity from prosecution almost three months ago, I understand Mr Gogarty has not signed any statement which would clarify finally what precisely he is, or is not, alleging.

If there have been any favours done for Bovale Ltd or JMSE, then I had nothing whatsoever to do with them. I assume that any members of this House aware of any such decision will declare their knowledge to this House and any involvement they might have had in any such decision. For my part, I have had no involvement, direct or indirect, in any such decisions.

I ceased to be a member of Dublin County Council in 1987. While a member of Dublin County Council between 1985 and 1987, the only proposal I made with regard to any planning matter related to one private residence which was supported unanimously by all members of the council in attendance at the meeting in question. This matter arose in April 1986, when I was chairman of the council.

For the benefit of the House, I refer to a question put to the manager of Dublin County Council by my colleague, Mr Eamon Gilmore TD, in which he asked for the lists of all Section 4 and material contravention motions together with the names of the councillors who proposed and seconded them which were brought before the council from 1985 until 1989. The reply was given on December 11th, 1989.

The answer to Mr Gilmore's question shows that for the relevant part of that period during which I was a member of the council I neither proposed nor supported any motions involving Bovale Ltd, JMSE, Mr Michael Bailey, Mr Joseph Murphy jnr or Mr James Gogarty. I wish to place on the record of this House that, since I ceased to be a member of Dublin County Council in 1987, I have never asked for or urged support for any of these companies or individuals in the context of planning or material contravention motions or in any other matter.

The first review of the County Dublin Development Plan which took place after the 1989 general election was in 1991-1993. In relation to that plan, I actively campaigned against the rezoning proposals being made by the councils. On foot of reasonable and valid complaints from constituents and residents groups, I actively opposed the decisions that were being made and sought a reconsideration of them by the Fianna Fail group and the council.

I want to quote a letter to Ms Betty Coffey, the then chairperson of the Fianna Fail group, Dublin County Council, 46-49 O'Connell Street, Dublin 1, dated 4 August 1993, from my home, on Dail notepaper:

Dear Betty,

I write to you as chairperson of the Fianna Fail group on the council and I enclose a copy of a letter which I received from [a particular constituent] regarding the rezoning in Donabate. As you are aware, there is considerable annoyance in the north county area concerning the recent rezoning decisions and I believe it is in the interests of the party in the area that the group discuss the situation and alter the decision at the next stage of the review process. It would be impossible for me to specify each area of controversy but I would give you as examples the decisions in the Rivervalley area, the Christian Brothers' lands in Swords - there are many others.

Kindest personal regards,

Yours sincerely,

These matters were the subject of many discussions within the Fianna Fail organisation during which I expressed my opposition to these proposals. Furthermore, I led a delegation of Fianna Fail cumann members to meet the then Minister for the Environment, Mr Michael Smith TD, in November 1993, to express our opposition to the rezoning proposals for Dublin County Council as illustrated in the development plan and requested him not to sanction the revised plan.

With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that in accepting this contribution, even in good faith, I exposed myself to the risk of being the subject matter of malicious allegations of the type now being made. Any one of you who contest elections and depend on contributions to finance your campaigns - unless you belong to the fortunate few who inherit wealth - could find yourself where I am now had your path crossed that of a person who was prepared to make false charges against you, even if he refused to honour those charges with a signature.

If anything seems clear from the conflicting news stories relating to this affair, it is that Mr Gogarty's allegations against me form merely a small part of allegations being thrown by him against his former employers from whom he parted in acrimonious circumstances. I can only assume that he made these allegations in an attempt to bring pressure to bear on his former employers in the context of his dispute with them.

Indeed, in this context Mr Connolly [the Sunday Business Post journalist] confirmed in a radio interview that "from the very outset Mr Gogarty has been mostly concerned with his unresolved differences with his former employers, JMSE", and indeed Mr Connolly acknowledged that he had pursued the allegations against me "more actively than perhaps [Mr Gogarty] wished."

In my letter to you asking for permission to make this statement, I made the point that I was going to make a personal statement on a 1989 election contribution. I also indicated that I was willing to take a question-and-answer session on my statement. This is unprecedented in the House. I will be as forthcoming as I can be in any matter relating to the contribution which has been the subject of controversy.

In February, I will be a member of the House for 25 years. I have no intention of subjecting myself to a show trial to satisfy anyone's political agenda or setting a very undesirable precedent for this House. And I do not believe that the people who elected me to this House or the decent, fair-minded people of this country want or expect me to do so."