Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 14 Dec 1989

Vol. 394 No. 6

Private Notice Questions. - Reappointment of Ombudsman.

A number of Deputies have submitted Private Notice Questions and I will call them in the order in which they have submitted these questions to my office. I call first Deputy Dick Spring to put his question, then Deputy Rabbitte and Deputy Dukes.

asked the Minister for Finance in view of the widespread concern in relation to the reappointment of the Ombudsman and the acute time constraints relating thereto, if the Government have decided to reappoint the Ombudsman, and if a resolution will be placed before Dáil Éireann before its adjournment on Friday, 15 December 1989.

asked the Minister for Finance if, in view of the fact that the motion passed by Dáil Éireann on 25 October 1983 recommending that Michael Mills be appointed Ombudsman by the President, expires on 3 January 1990, and the fact that unless Dáil Éireann passes another motion before it rises for the Christmas recess tomorrow, the office of the Ombudsman will become vacant on 3 January; if the Government intend to recommend the reappointment of Michael Mills or recommend the appointment of some other person; the steps the Government intend to take to ensure that citizens of this country have recourse to the services of an Ombudsman as provided for in the Ombudsman Act, 1980; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

asked the Minister for Finance if it is his intention to move a motion in Dáil Éireann recommending to the President, pursuant to the provisions of section 2 (2) of the Ombudsman Act, 1980, the appointment of Mr. Michael Mills to the office of Ombudsman.

I propose to take all three questions together.

The matter is under consideration and the appropriate procedure will be followed. The appropriate motion will be placed before both Houses tomorrow.

Why did the Minister not say that earlier?

While one is tempted to say game, set and match, could I request the Minister for Finance to confirm that the present incumbent of the office of Ombudsman will be reappointed tomorrow morning?

I will not drop the ball. The Deputy will have to wait until tomorrow.

Shades of the Ambassador to Washington.

I call Deputy Dukes.

May I ask the Minister when the motion will be circulated?

As soon as possible.

This is a public office and you are treating it with contempt.

(Interruptions.)

The Government are being found out.

Let us maintain order.

The Opposition are making a monkey of him.

Let us maintain good order and decorum at this juncture.

Fine Gael are politicising the Office.

The Government are playing games with the Office.

Not even anyone behind the Taoiseach believes that.

A Deputy

We have never seen so many of the Opposition in the House at 3.50 p.m. before.

(Interruptions.)

Let the interruptions cease forthwith. I am calling Deputy Rabbitte.

This is outrageous.

May I ask the Minister if he agrees that the present incumbent of the Office of Ombudsman has carried out his functions with impeccable fairness and independence and was considered an inspired choice by this House when the appointment was made, with the agreement of Fianna Fáil? Does the Minister not consider that it is entirely inappropriate that at the eleventh hour, and in this fashion, the Opposition parties should have to bring the Minister into this House kicking and screaming in order to extract a commitment to bring forward a motion——

What is the Deputy talking about?

The Deputy may not make a speech.

I am not making a speech.

The Deputy is making a speech.

May I finally ask the Minister if the manner in which the Government have dealt with this issue betrays contempt for the Office of the Ombudsman?

There is no need for the Deputy to make a speech.

Would the Minister communicate——

The Deputy will be afforded the opportunity of commenting on this matter tomorrow, as will all Deputies of this House.

Deputy Rabbitte is very new to this House to be lecturing us. With the sort of political philosophy the Deputy's party espouse, there would be no Office of the Ombudsman.

I am calling Deputy Spring.

In the course of the Minister's very brief response, which I welcomed, he said that the matter was under consideration. May I ask the Minister to clarify to this House since when the matter has been under consideration and if it has been discussed in Cabinet?

I would like to remind the Deputy that as a former office holder he should know that these matters are discussed at Cabinet first and then the appropriate motions are put before the House.

They have not been discussed yet.

This matter has not been——

Even though the Deputy's party may have decided to talk about everything when they were in Government we do not do that.

Does the Minister deny that that is a fact?

We never had to make special arrangements for telephone lines or recorders.

(Interruptions.)

Questions have been asked of the Minister and Deputies should please do him the courtesy of listening to his replies.

The Deputy messed up enough things in his day. He should stay in retirement.

It is regrettable that some members of the Opposition have chosen to personalise and politicise the office of the Ombudsman.

As usual.

It is the Government who appears to be doing that.

That is rubbish.

The pair of them have been found out again.

The Ombudsman is a servant of both Houses of the Oireachtas and his appointment is made on the recommendations of both Houses to the President. I would have thought that the Members of this House would be concerned to ensure that both Houses and the people of the State would have an Ombudsman at their disposal, irrespective of who he is.

You got caught.

It is not quite clear that they are not concerned with the Office; it is a question of personalisation and politicisation.

That is unfair.

You are trying to strangle the Office.

It is political smog.

If the concern shown today had been shown when the Act was being drafted some of the unnecessary delay might have been avoided.

Hear, hear.

This is a disgraceful way to treat the House.

Can we assume that John Healy will not be appointed?

This matter comes before the House tomorrow——

May I ask the Minister a question?

A brief supplementary.

Would the Minister not agree it is in the interests of Members of this House that prior to our having to consider the motion tomorrow the identity of the person to be appointed to the Office of Ombudsman on foot of such a motion should be revealed to Members of this House? Can the Minister indicate if there is any particular reason the identity of the person should remain a national secret until tomorrow morning?

The Deputy is not in the running.

The motion will be placed before the House tomorrow morning in accordance with the Statute.

Will the procedure previously adopted of consulting the Opposition on the nomination of an Ombudsman be followed on this occasion?

The Opposition were not consulted; they were told.

They were consulted and the Taoiseach knows it.

Order, please.

Can I get an answer from the Taoiseach to my question?

I had hoped to get on to item No. 9.

If some people took the cotton wool out of their ears they would know that I have already said that the appropriate procedure will be pursued. The appropriate motion will be placed before both Houses of the Oireachtas tomorrow.

There will be no consultation.

That is not the question I asked.

That is the question the Deputy asked.

I asked the Minister if the Opposition will be consulted before the motion is placed before the House tomorrow.

It is a non-political, independent office.

Under the procedures drawn up by Statute by all the gentlemen who are so disappointed in the——

This is a grave mistake to make before Christmas——

(Interruptions.)

If the provisions of the Act had been made clear when it was drafted the delay the Deputies are complaining about might not have occurred.

I will allow no further reference to this matter now. It will come before the House tomorrow.

Was that agreed between the Whips?

Will the Taoiseach answer my question?

The Deputies can ventilate their views tomorrow.

Can I get an answer to my question?

I have no control over that, Deputy.

I am surprised the Progressive Democrats are a party to this.

Deputy Dukes is offering.

Can I have the courtesy of an answer to my question which I have put three times to the Minister? Will the Opposition be consulted or not?

I have nothing further to add.

May I——

Sorry, Deputy Quinn, I am calling Deputy Dukes.

While it is not directly germane to the discussion we have just had — I am glad we finally extracted a statement from the Minister, with the very reluctant acquiescence of the Taoiseach, that an Ombudsman will be appointed — I wish to raise another matter.

There are a number of ways open to Members of this House of raising matters and the Chair permitted questions on this issue. I wrote to you this morning, Sir, indicating that it was my intention under the provisions of Standing Order 143 to move the suspension of Standing Orders so that a motion could be discussed. My office received a reply from your office to the effect that Standing Order 143 could not be used in this case because it relates only to Private Members' Time. We have had this discussion in the House before and I am bound to say, with the utmost humility and without wishing to raise a row, that it is my considered opinion that your ruling is not quite accurate. There is nothing in Standing Order 143 which relates in any way, however remotely, to Private Members' Time. I wish to remind you, Sir, that I previously told you it was my intention to have that matter clarified by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges because that ruling represents a totally unjustified interference with the rights of Members of this House.

I would be glad if the Deputy proceeded along those lines so that the matter might be clarified.

Top
Share