Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Jul 1997

Vol. 480 No. 3

Committee of Selection: First Report.

The Committee of Selection reports that it has nominated the following Members to serve on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges: Deputies Theresa Ahearn, Seán Barrett, Michael Bell, Séamus Brennan (Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach), John Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny), Ivor Callely, Donal Carey, Charles Flanagan, Tony Gregory, Jim Higgins, Brendan Howlin, Cecilia Keaveney, Tony Killeen, Brian Lenihan, Desmond J. O'Malley, Dick Roche and Brendan Smith.

I want to give an undertaking to Democratic Left, the Green Party and others in the House that the Independent position on this committee is being filled by Deputy Gregory merely to enable it to commence its work. As soon as procedures are agreed to receive a nominee from those groups and the Independents, the position will be filled in that way.

I move: "That the report be laid before the Dáil."

It was agreed on the Order of Business that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges be appointed. However, there was no agreement with regard to when that motion would be taken by the House. For some reason best known to himself, the Government Chief Whip chose to arbitrarily select and appoint an Independent Member of the House when parties with two and four Members, respectively, were not consulted about this matter. I do not wish to delay the important work of this committee but I am at a loss to understand the arbitrary selection that has been promoted by the Government Chief Whip. If I understand his remarks correctly, the Government Chief Whip also stated that this arrangement will be reconsidered. However, if I am not to call a vote on this matter I must ask him when it will be reconsidered.

Arising from the meeting of the Committee of Selection, am I to understand that it will be reconsidered when and if this House, in accordance with this morning's decision, is reconvened to consider the McCracken report? Will negotiations about the groups arrangement be done in the interim? With the utmost respect to the House, I must indicate that the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Brennan, will be surprised at the extent to which my party will be able to not facilitate the speedy work of the House.

I will endeavour to satisfy the Deputy's requirement as soon as the House meets again, if that proves practical, and ensure that that nomination is properly received from the Independent groups. The Deputy is aware that substantial negotiations must take place regarding the mechanism by which we receive a nominee of the Independent groups. I understand that substantial discussions must take place about the number of technical groups that may be available and other related matters. It is a simple choice: we either proceed with the work of the committee by this mechanism or we postpone its deliberations until the autumn. I have chosen to do the former and I give the Deputy my undertaking and that of Deputy Gregory that his involvement is merely a technical measure to enable the committee begin its work. A proper procedure to fill that Independent position will be put in place as soon as is practical, possibly on the next occasion on which the Dáil meets.

I seek clarification on a number of points. One way or the other, this House will reconvene on 30 September. In order to reassure everyone in the House that business is being done properly, would it not be better that the appointment of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges be time limited up to that date and that we would appoint a new committee at that point? It appears that it would be virtually impossible for the House to insist on Deputy Gregory stepping down from that committee unless there is a written guarantee to this effect by him or unless the House decides that he should do so, that is, that the appointment is time limited. As matters stand, the Committee on Procedure and Privileges is being appointed for the duration of this Dáil.

The Minister of State referred to Independent Members of the House. I am not an Independent Member but a member of a political party. The formation of this committee is very important. It deals with Members' rights and privileges. I am anxious to have my rights represented on the committee.

I understand that Standing Orders require that the committee is required to be appointed so as to be impartially representative of the Dáil. It cannot be impartially representative of the Dáil if one of the parties is not represented. I also understand that on the last occasion a party represented in this House comprised of four Members it was represented on the committee. Will the Minister of State indicate how I, as a member of a party, may be represented on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, given its wide remit and its importance for the rights and privileges of Members?

I am not sure if we can debate the committee structures here because, given the make up of the Dáil, substantial negotiations must take place on all of the committees and how they are to be filled. As of now, I have received no notification of a technical group of seven Members, although I have an indication of a proposal from Deputy Rabbitte to amend the Standing Orders and make six the minimum membership of such a group.

There is nothing untoward here. A consultant's report has been ordered from Professor Lever which is due imminently. Given the request of Deputy John Bruton that some work be done in committee I considered it important that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges receive that report this month or next and study it over the recess so that when the Dáil resumes it would be in a position to advise on how we might structure the rest of the committees. If we do not do this it could be well into Christmas before the committees are properly established.

That is the only reason for the haste here. There is no other agenda. Deputy Gregory indicated to the Committee of Selection this morning that his involvement in this is purely technical. He understands that he will vacate the position in order to seek a nominee from whatever groups are enabled to make one when the shape of the technical groups, etc., becomes apparent. That does not mean he will not be available to be renominated, but he has indicated to the Committee of Selection that he intends to proceed in this way. I take his word for that and I recommend that the report by the Committee of Selection be adopted. I understand it is for the information of the House.

We do not wish to continue debating this matter.

This is not about Deputy Gregory, nor about whether one accepts his word or not; there is no question of not accepting it. That is not the issue. When the Minister of State says there is nothing untoward here there may have been nothing untoward intended. However, the Committee of Selection was established this morning without any consultation with my party or the Green Party. That committee has a major influence on the selection of virtually all of the committees of this House. It was a major decision, yet two parties in the House were not even consulted. By contrast, the Chief Whip arbitrarily decided to approach an Independent Deputy and appoint him. I do not suggest that this was intended. It is 25 years since the Minister of State first pulled a stroke like that on me and I am sure he would not do it now. However, that is its effect.

It is important that this be put right because the Committee of Selection will have a major influence on the network of committees formed by this House. As it stands at present, two parties, the Green Party and my party, were not consulted about this move. It should not have been done this way because it should have been fairly representative of the groups and parties in the House. As it stands, it is not.

It is not accurate to say that the Committee of Selection appoints all of the committees, even though it technically does so. The other committees are filled and will be filled in consultation with the parties and Members entitled to be consulted under Standing Orders. I would be interested in knowing how the stroke I pulled on Deputy Rabbitte 25 years ago worked out.

It is the Committee on Procedure and Privileges we are discussing. It has a very important role with regard to the House, the operation of the House and the work of Deputies. The Ceann Comhairle is automatically its chairperson. It is not, therefore, an ordinary committee.

It is extraordinary that for the next three months at least, a committee will operate which will have excluded two parties, Democratic Left and the Green Party, apparently at the whim of the Chief Whip who has decided to request Deputy Gregory to sit on the committee.

Suppose Deputy Gregory intends to comply with his offer to act on a technical basis in a temporary way but that other negotiations do not proceed as the Government wishes, what mechanism is there for the Chief Whip or the Government to disband the committee having established it, given that it is a committee established by the House? It will not be possible to ask any Member of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, or of any committee of the House, to stand down because this is not within the remit of the Chief Whip or the Government. In view of this, I ask that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges which is being established today should be time limited to 30 September at the latest.

Is the Deputy proposing an amendment to that effect?

I am asking the Chief Whip to co-operate with the parties on the Opposition benches to ensure that fair play is done to all parties.

An amendment could be proposed to the effect that the Committee on Selection reports that "it has nominated, until the 30 September, the following Members to serve on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges."

We do not want to debate the issue.

I am not debating it.

There is a motion before the House which the House can either accept or reject.

May I propose an amendment?

No. We are obliged to accept the motion as presented to the House. I understand that the Committee of Selection has made a recommendation in accordance with Standing Orders. The points made by the Deputies may well be discussed by the Whips to see how they can be addressed. The Minister of State has given an undertaking. We cannot continue to debate the matter.

May I respectfully suggest that there is no such a thing as a motion before the House that may not be amended by a Member. The Member may be unsuccessful, but the Member's right to put forward an amendment cannot be challenged. If we insert after the words "it has nominated" the words "to serve until 30 September" and that is what the Minister of State intended, then we have agreement until 30 September.

The difficulty is that the Deputy seeks to amend the wording of the report, yet the House is being asked to accept the report presented by the Committee of Selection.

I can change the terms of the amendment so that it would indicate that we accept the Report of the Committee of Selection subject to the amendment.

The Minister of State indicated agreement to the proposal.

If he agrees is there a need for argument?

I have no difficulty with it if it is in order. However, I am not sure it is, given that this is an announcement to the House.

The relevant Standing Order requires that the committee be constituted to be impartially representative of the Dáil. As two parties have not been consulted on the composition of the committee is the original proposal in order?

I have a common cause for concern. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle pointed out that the report may be discussed between the Whips but that is the nub of the problem. We will not be represented at that discussion.

We cannot debate the issues now.

Then there will not be a debate.

The Minister of State has agreed the committee will be in place until 30 September and I am prepared to accept that.

Provided that is in order.

If the amended motion is not agreed the motion falls. The committee could not continue as per the original proposal because that is not agreed by the House.

If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle accepts the agreement of the Minister of State then it is agreed and is in order.

The motion, as amended, will read: "That the First Report of the Committee of Selection be laid before the Dáil and shall have effect until 30 September, 1997".

Question, "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to" put and agreed to.
Top
Share