Select Committee on Finance and General Affairs debate -
Thursday, 20 Mar 1997

SECTION 10.

Mr. Dempsey

I move amendment No. 49:

In page 11, lines 6 to 8, to delete subsection (1) and substitute the following:

"(1) A Constituency Commission shall be served by the staff of the Public Office Commission and the Minister shall make available to a Constituency Commission such other services, including the services of additional staff, as may be reasonably required by the Commission: provided that any additional staff seconded shall be under the sole direction of the Constituency Commission.".

This amendment returns to the points I made earlier about the commission not just being said to be independent but being seen by the public to be independent. I propose that the Public Offices Commission should staff and serve the constituency commission rather than the Department. It is necessary the commission should be properly staffed for the time it is in place. My proposal would enhance, underline and highlight the image of the commission as being independent and serviced on an independent basis by people from the Public Offices Commission. The proposal is in keeping with earlier amendments I tabled.

Drawing on people from the Public Offices Commission does not preclude the commission from drawing on the expertise of the franchise section of the Department of the Environment. The section provides data and statistics and advises and clarifies when questions arise. That is the only time there is a need for an input from the Department. The suspicion will always be that, if the Department is involved and has its finger in the pie, so does the Minister. If you try to convince people it is independent, they do not believe you and cite the fact that a certain Deputy's constituency was drawn in a particular way to ensure he was re-elected. It is all pub talk and anecdotes.

If we establish that this is an independent commission, there must be distance between it and the Department. This important amendment is necessary. Perhaps the Minister will say the Public Offices Commission will not have enough staff or that it is overworked but he has indicated he will make staff available so that argument should not arise. This amendment will underline the Minister's and our genuineness in ensuring the commission is independent. I am sure the Minister will see the light as regards the amendment and will accept it without question.

Mr. Howlin

The Deputy has a view of the Department of the Environment which first precluded the secretary from being a member of the commission and now precludes any member of staff being involved with the commission except at one remove. There is confusion because I told the Deputy I would reflect on the work of the commission as it makes the decisions. The rest are support staff and the best technical people are the franchise section of the Department of the Environment. They have the data, expertise and experience. We might as well have the best support staff available from the beginning.

I ask the Deputy not to press the amendment because there is a tight time frame within which to do the work in an efficient way and with the best support staff available. The Public Offices Commission has no expertise in this area and many additional functions are being devolved on it about which it is concerned. I want to address that issue in terms of giving it extra support. It is being given enough extra work in this Bill without being asked to deal with this. For those reasons, I cannot accept the Deputy's amendment and I ask him not to press it.

Mr. Dempsey

I do not accept the Minister's reasoning on this. We are trying to make the commission independent. The Minister stated earlier that the only input of the franchise section of his Department to this process is the supply of facts, figures, etc. When this information is made available to the commission the section is not needed and its members can make their submission or recommendations as outside experts. Members of the commission are supposed to make decisions thereafter.

I cannot understand the Minister not accepting this amendment. I do not have any views on the staff of the Department and I do not mean it to be inferred from anything I say that I do not trust them or that I believe they are involved in a sleight of hand. The Minister proposes to make this body independent.

The Bill is largely concerned with public perception. If the Minister wants to introduce major changes to the electoral system with regard to the funding of political parties, expenditure limits, etc., in response to what he believes to be the public perception, he must address the problem that the public perception is that these commissions are led by his Department. People will not be convinced if the Department of the Environment has an active role in drafting this report or feeding information to the commission.

The purpose of the exercise is to put this matter on a statutory footing. However, if its purpose is also to allay public fears that the Minister or the Government has an undue influence on the commission all necessary measures must be taken. If he does not accept this or a similar amendment, this part of the Bill will be seen as a sham. While statutory authority will be provided, the Minister and the Government will continue to pull the strings.

Mr. Lenihan

The Act provides that the Chief Justice nominates the chairperson of the commission, so the Judiciary is formally involved on a legislative basis in the formation of this commission. Under the previous arrangement, a High Court or Supreme Court judge effectively did the Government a favour in preparing a report.

However, once the Judiciary is mentioned formally in a report and given a statutory function in a matter, there is an onus on us as legislators to ensure that it does not appear to be involved in any way in the executive arm of Government. For example, if when the tribunal of inquiry into the beef industry was established, it was suggested that the secretariat to the tribunal would be the then Department of Agriculture and Food, considerable concern would have been expressed in the House. Likewise with the recent tribunal of inquiry on hepatitis C. There is a case, therefore, for making a legislative provision that the secretariat to this commission should be seen to be independent. The question of the independence of the Judiciary arises here because it is referred to in a formal setting.

Mr. Howlin

Both Deputies are making much of little. We ask that the most competent people be available to serve in support of the commission. The commission comprises eminently independent individuals, chaired by an appointee drawn from either the Supreme Court or the High Court. Their independence is beyond question and they make the decisions. However, I will reflect further and if I am convinced that the fear is genuine I will look again at the matter for Report Stage.

Mr. Dempsey

There is a genuine fear. These eminent, independent people can only make decisions on the basis of the information given to them. If the information is fed from a specific area and that area is perceived to be partisan, or could be partisan, there is a real danger. I am not convinced that the Minister will give this serious consideration.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Howlin

I move amendment No. 50:

In page 11, subsection (2), line 9, after "Director" where it firstly occurs, to insert "General".

This, and amendment No. 51 are simple, technical amendments. This amendment updates the title of the head of the Central Statistics Office to Director General, which is his appropriate and current title.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Howlin

I move amendment No.51:

In page 11, subsection (2), line 11, after "provide" to insert "free of charge".

This amendment clarifies that assistance to the commission by the Central Statistics Office and the Ordnance Survey will be provided to the commission free of charge. It seem inappropriate for State agencies to charge for such services.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 10, as amended, agreed to.

Section 11 agreed to.