Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 3 Apr 2001

Vol. 533 No. 6

Priority Questions. - Ministerial Appointments.

Derek McDowell

Question:

34 Mr. McDowell asked the Minister for Finance the criteria he used in making appointments to the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commission; the reason there was only one woman among the seven nominees, having regard to the Government's stated commitment to a gender balance in all appointments; the reason no trade union representative was appointed, having regard to the provisions of the National Pensions Reserve Fund Act, 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9912/01]

One of the principal functions of the National Pensions Fund Commission is to determine and implement an investment strategy for the fund. The commission is independent of the Government in the exercise of this and its other functions. My main aim in making appointments to the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commission was to select persons of the necessary stature and calibre to manage the fund and who would be seen to be independent of Government in the performance of their functions.

The National Pensions Reserve Fund Act requires that as far as practicable, the Minister for Finance shall ensure an equitable balance between men and women in the composition of the commission. However, in appointing the commission I also had to have regard to the provisions of the Act which require commissioners to have acquired substantial expertise and experience at a senior level in areas such as accountancy, finance or economics, law or any of the other areas set out in section 7(4) of the Act. In choosing the commissioners I have tried to take account of both these objectives.

As I have already mentioned, section 7(4) of the Act sets out areas from which commissioners may be chosen. Trade union representation is one of these areas. The purpose of the subsection is to ensure only persons who have certain expertise and experience may be appointed to the fund. However, the commission is an expert rather than a representative body.

Mr. McDowell: Is the Minister aware that in a recent survey it was shown that his Department is second only to the Department of Defence in the paucity of women it appoints to State boards? A figure of 20% applies, rather than the Government target of 40%. Does he wish to confirm, repeat or deny the comments attributed to him in the press last month that he found it difficult to find women who did this sort of complicated work? Is he seriously suggesting that it was only possible to find one woman who met the criteria he has just described?

I do not recall saying that. My ministerial colleague, Deputy Cullen, believes another colleague may have said it.

It sounds like something the Minister might have said.

There are many things I might feel like saying but I restrain myself from doing so.

Not very often.

During the debate on Committee Stage I set out, in section 7(4), the areas from which members of the commission should be appointed. The Act is the only one I am aware of which includes a subsection setting out the required expertise of appointees to a commission.

Deputy McDowell refers to the fact that no trade union representative was appointed. It was never the intention that people would be appointed to the commission as representatives of a particular sector. Appointees were required to have substantial expertise and experience at a senior level in a number of areas which are specified in section 7(4). These include trade union representation.

The Minister anticipates me too well. I have not mentioned trade union representation yet, although it is referred to in the question.

It is referred to in the question.

I asked the Minister if he could find only one woman among the seven qualified persons.

When making appointments to a board I do not begin by wondering where I will find a number of men and a number of women. I try to appoint the best people. If the best people for a seven person board were all women I would appoint them. The same would apply if the best people were all men. That is what I tried to do in this case. In preparing the Bill and during its passage through the Oireachtas, I made it clear that I intended to appoint people to the board who were of considerable stature and who would be recognised as people of substance and experience in their fields. That is what I have endeavoured to do. The choice was mine and it was then approved by the Government.

Mr. McDowell: What the Minister has said is not in keeping with Government policy. The programme for Government clearly identifies a target of 40% women appointees to State boards. The Minister has just made a nonsense of that target and has made it clear he does not support it.

On Committee Stage there was some discussion about trade union representation. It was my understanding and the expectation of the trade union movement that the Minister would consider the appointment of a trade unionist to the commission. Did the Minister consider that and if so, why did he reject it?

I considered it and did something about it. One of the appointees, Ms Brid Horan, is a former senior official with what is now called the MSF and was chairperson of the ICTU women's committee. She was senior delegate to ICTU conferences on a regular basis. She is consulted by numerous unions and the ICTU on pension matters and has tutored on training courses for pension trustees. Deputy McDowell should know that Ms Horan has considerable expertise in trade union affairs.

The answer to Deputy McDowell's question is, yes. I gave due consideration to the matter. Ms Horan would probably have been appointed in any event. She has considerable experience as an actuary and has a role in relation to the ESB pension fund. She has considerable experience of trade union affairs. If the Deputy does not know her, he certainly knows her husband, whose name is not Horan.

Top
Share