Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Mar 2003

Vol. 563 No. 1

Ceisteanna – Questions. - Ministerial Appointments.

Enda Kenny

Question:

5 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the appointments made by him since June 2002 to State boards or other agencies within his aegis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27105/02]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Question:

6 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the appointments he has made to State boards since June 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3453/03]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

7 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the appointments he has made to State boards since June 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5405/03]

Joe Higgins

Question:

8 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the appointments he has made to State boards since June 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6884/03]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 8, inclusive, together.

The bodies under the aegis of my Department are the National Statistics Board, the National Economic and Social Council, NESC, the National Economic and Social Forum, NESF, the Information Society Commission, the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, NCPP, and the Law Reform Commission.

The Oireachtas strand of the National Economic and Social Forum comprises 15 members and this has changed to reflect the changed composition of the Houses. The members are appointed on the basis of discussions between the Whips. Some of these vacancies remain to be filled. The term of office of the members of the NESC and the NESF was extended by three months, to the end of March 2003. Other than those changes, no appointments have been made to these bodies by me since June 2002.

I refer the Taoiseach to the general cynicism that has been around for some time about prison visiting committees and the appointment of members to those committees.

That is the responsibility of another Minister.

The question refers to State boards and I want the Taoiseach to comment on the matter.

That is correct, but the question refers specifically to the Taoiseach's Department. Prison visiting committees are the responsibility of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

Since the Ceann Comhairle is ruling very narrowly today – perhaps it is following Cavan's recent performance – may I ask the Taoiseach if he has any plans to change the way in which appointments are made to State boards? In the case of prison visiting committees, half of the 60 members are former Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats candidates.

I have already ruled on the question. I suggest the Deputy submit a question on the matter to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.

The Deputy is not suggesting the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform would appoint people—

I am not suggesting that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform would make such appointments. It appears, however, that this is some sort of benevolent fund for former or failed candidates. Will the Taoiseach comment on the method of assessment and the criteria used for the appointment of such persons?

I cannot answer on behalf of the prison visiting committees, but I disagree with the present system of appointments to boards which excludes former politicians. It would be better for the country if former politicians from all parties were appointed, especially former Ministers. They have a greater knowledge and understanding of what is involved and would be more competent than most in the exercise of their duties and functions.

That must mean that some of us are due for appointment.

Is the Taoiseach aware that in 1991, the then Government issued guidelines to implement the recommendations of the Second Commission on the Status of Women? They require Ministers and Departments to ensure that women constitute 40% of all appointments to State boards. In a report published last November, the National Women's Council shows that members of the Cabinet have consistently failed to reach their targets. Similarly, while some State boards have a better record than others, the guidelines are not being met. Will the Taoiseach indicate if his Department has met the 40% guid eline and, if not, why? Last week, International Women's Week was celebrated throughout the country. The Taoiseach was not present in the House and this is the first chance Members have to ask what he is doing to ensure that this standard is met by all Departments.

I support the 40% guideline and will, on a general basis, do everything I can to achieve the target. Most of the boards under the aegis of my Department are made up of outside bodies, such as social partnership. We always emphasise to them the need when making appointments to meet the target. I am not sure if we reach the target in all cases but we try to comply.

Does the Taoiseach accept it is time to reconsider the way in which appointments to boards are made? Does he also accept it is time to establish an independent public appointments system, especially in view of the questions that arise over what are perceived to be the political nature of appointment decisions? The decision by An Bord Pleanála regarding the proposed incinerator at Carranstown, recently in the media headlines, is an example. Does the Taoiseach accept it is time to put clear water between the suspicion that there is link between Government policy and appointments to the boards of State bodies?

Will the Taoiseach indicate whether his Department has issued guidelines on appointments to State boards and the requirement to meet a gender balance? I understand that last July, the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea, wrote to every Minister on the issue.

This question refers specifically to appointments by the Department of the Taoiseach.

The Minister of State wrote to the Department of the Taoiseach. That is the reason I have asked whether the Taoiseach responded. I understand a deadline of January 2003 was indicated for a response.

The boards under the aegis of my Department are, by and large, made up by outside nominations. They are always requested to nominate members on a gender balanced basis and they do so.

Is the Taoiseach referring to the guidelines?

I am referring to the guidelines. The guideline followed is 40%. The membership of the social partnership and the information society boards is based on the suitability of the people available. In some cases there is more of one sex than the other. It is only right that an effort is made to maintain the gender balance across Departments and the Government follows that on the boards.

I agree that the boards should be independent. The Deputy is aware that An Bord Pleanála, which was established by the 1983 Act, is one of the more independent boards. That does not stop people making comments. We can go over the top in our efforts for independence. We try to rule this and that person out and then get to the stage—

They are independent.

We get to the stage where in five years time if a person is even seen talking to a politician in Leinster House he will never be appointed to a board. That is absolute nonsense.

I asked a question about the independence of the boards.

The boards are independent. They are not politically appointed. The appointments are made by nominating bodies. That is how the boards of An Bord Pleanála and NESC were appointed. They are independent bodies. The Deputy's definition of independence may be different to mine but as far as I am concerned suitability, qualifications and competence are what are important. The Deputy probably thinks the fact a board member might have been seen with a politician in the past hundred years means the board is not independent but I do not.

I asked another question.

Sorry, I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

None of us would go to the extreme of saying that if a person was seen in Cheltenham, for example, he would not be fit to be appointed to a State board although it might certainly be an argument against appointment.

Horses for courses.

I imagine anybody in Cheltenham would be seen talking to many Irish politicians. What criteria does the Taoiseach use when he appoints people to the boards under his jurisdiction? Does he go up and down every tree in the vicinity, so to speak, to see if they are qualified and have expertise in the area covered by the board concerned? How does he establish that? Does the Taoiseach agree that appointments to State boards are discredited and despised by ordinary people because of the perception that it is not the expertise of the appointees that is the main criteria but whether they are loyal hacks of the establishment parties which happen to be in Government?

I will go through the boards that I appoint one by one. The National Statistics Board is a non-statutory board. Normally we would look for people who are expert in the area of statistics or who are qualified statisticians. On the board of NESC we would have people who have been members of social partnerships and who would have been nominated by those boards. The Information Society Commission is also made up of competent people who are expert in their field. We could go through the names of these people or I could give the lists of members of the boards. The Law Reform Commission has members from the eminent professions of the legal world and it is led by the honourable Mr. Justice Declan Budd. The members of all these boards are competent people.

I disagree with Deputy Higgins and do not think the public at large feels boards are discredited. They believe the people who serve on these boards do a good job in return for little or nothing. They give up valuable time to serve on boards and sub-committees. I resent the fact that the Deputy, or anyone else, would question the integrity of board members who give of their time for practically nothing – I think they may get €500 a year.

I am talking about the criteria on which they are chosen.

Allow the Taoiseach without interruption, please.

They are confident, competent and qualified people. There have been a few breaches over the years but, by and large, the people who sit on State boards are highly competent people. When we sit in the national Parliament we should not criticise people. It is becoming increasingly difficult for people who serve on State boards, as there are more responsibilities and legal difficulties with which to cope. They are not a crowd of old hacks, they are people of expertise who are giving their service to the State, which it is increasingly difficult to do.

Why is there not an independent way of appointing them?

If we have an independent basis we will have Deputy Sargent questioning the independence of the Act on behalf of those who do not have faith in its autonomy. The board was set up because that argument existed 20 years ago. I remember the debate well, it was a hostile one. My party attacked Deputy Spring at the time – probably wrongly if we go back over it.

The Taoiseach had too much to do to answer for Ray Burke.

That was not that time.

It was that time.

Twenty years later people are still raising the issue of the independence of the board.

We still remember Ray Burke.

I remember him too. These boards are independent with competent and qualified people sitting on them. I do not subscribe to the view that we should be critical of them, as I said earlier in regard to politicians.

Does the Taoiseach think there will be any State boards left by the end of the lifetime of the Government to which to appoint anyone? One could not open a newspaper last week or switch on a television without seeing the most recent acquisition to Government, the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Parlon, like a crazed auctioneer swinging his gavel to sell whatever property fell within his path. Can the Taoiseach reassure the House that there will be State boards to which eminent people might be appointed on a pluralist basis?

In regard to gender balance, the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea, recently threatened to bring in legislation to cause his Cabinet colleagues to observe the 40% rule. I presume he was only driven to those extremes because he thought it necessary to bring in legislation. Is it the general picture in Government that the 40% rule is not being observed?

In reply to the first question, I think we have more State boards now than we had five years ago. While one or two may have ceased to exist there is a considerable number of additional ones.

The gender balance on boards is always a bit of a battle, both on the part of nominating bodies and Departments to try to ensure that this is maintained. The position has improved and the Minister is right to keep the pressure on to try to achieve the target.

I looked at the Taoiseach's nominees in respect of the boards under the control of his Department and it is fair to say that there is a broad spread of expertise evident there. Many of these people appear to have been appointed by the groups they represent.

I share the view of other speakers in regard to the matter of gender balance. The former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Mervyn Taylor, who had responsibility for this area in the rainbow Government was very exacting in regard to reflecting a strong gender balance in appointments, which I think everybody can support.

The Taoiseach referred to the responsible way in which former politicians have used their experience in respect of State boards. Prior to the flotation of Telecom Éireann, the political appointees to the board were asked to step down. In the case of Aer Lingus, there are a number of political appointees there—

The Deputy is again straying away from the subject of the boards that are the responsibility of the Taoiseach's Department.

In the event of Aer Lingus looking for global aviation features, will the Taoiseach say if a similar situation would apply there?

The Minister has already started moving in that regard to appoint aviation experts. Whatever happens to the future of the board, the Minister has moved in that way.

As State boards, particularly the boards of commercial semi-State bodies, are concerned with big business, are highly complex and work in a very tight regulatory area one does not find people queuing up to take positions on them. Appointees to State boards realise very quickly that their appointments involve stringent commitments. Taking a position on a State board is very different today from ten or 20 years ago. It is becoming more and more difficult to find serious players for State boards, but that is what we have to do.

Seán McCague might qualify. Would he not?

I asked a question earlier to which I did not get a straight reply. I know the Taoiseach has feelings about the need for gender balance. Did the Minister of State with responsibility for equality write to the Taoiseach's Department and did the Taoiseach reply to the Minister of State, putting his feelings on paper? That is the question I asked earlier.

In view of the fact that the system for making local authority appointments was found to be unsatisfactory and that the Local Appointments Commission was set up, does the Taoiseach see an independent public appointments system, which could be seen as such, as a logical follow-on to the Local Appointments Commission? In such a system lobbying would disqualify and the Taoiseach and Ministers could point to it as being similar to the system for making local authority appointments. Is it time for such a system to restore some of the credibility which has been lost in the public mind? When a decision such as the Bord Pleanála decision is made one asks why we do not have an independent appointments system and why the Government retains the right to make appointments, which compromises the independence of State boards.

I do not know if Deputy O'Dea wrote to my Department. He has been in touch with all Ministers, including myself, about the question of gender balance on boards. I am sure he has written to my Department – he speaks to all Members continually on this matter.

The Bord Pleanála Act took powers away from the Government and gave them to nominating bodies. The Government appoints very few, if any, members to Bord Pleanála. People who have not been in Government may not appreciate – and I say that respectfully – that one does not have large numbers of people sending in CVs and seeking appointments to boards. That may have been the position in the past but it is not so now, given the regulatory climate that now exists. Whatever the task, one has to look for people with the necessary expertise.

Does the Government not advertise?

One does not advertise. That is not a workable basis. The Government of the day has to look around. Increasingly, one requires people with international expertise and it is hard to find them. That may not be so in the case of some of the smaller and less significant boards but it is not easy to find competent and experienced people for the important main boards. Any chairman of a board or Minister wants to get people of the highest calibre because that is what makes a body function effectively.

The Government guidelines introduced 12 years ago in 1991 were not aspirational. During the course of the 28th Dáil, what percentage of the Taoiseach's appointees to State boards were women?

What steps has he taken in the current Dáil to address the imbalance? Picking up on the last response which the Taoiseach gave, will he agree the public advertisement inviting people to come forward who have real expertise, knowledge, qualification is the only way one can make a real assessment of the available pool of talent and suitability for such appointments? Surely, that is the major error in terms of the limited candidate pool. It is hardly beyond the bounds of possibility that this is based on the traditional view that cronyism rules O.K. How else would one know who is out there?

Before the Taoiseach responds I will take a final supplementary from Deputy James Breen.

How many people with disabilities are appointed to State Boards and has the Government a policy on such appointments?

Practically all the appointments to boards are made by the nominating groups and they are all on the public record. All the nominating bodies are asked to take account of the gender balance rule. The names are in the public domain and people have those names. In the case of the Information Society Commission, we take gender balance into account as we do with any of the other boards. The statistics board is chaired by a woman and a number of its members are women. We comply with the gender balance rule to the best of our ability. In regard to the independence of the board, often it is not the Minister but the agency that seeks members. Recently, the Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, in the appointment of boards has looked not only inside the country but outside the country for suitable people with expertise.

He did not look far for appointments to Aer Lingus, only to Drumcondra. What expertise have they got?

There are very competent people in Drumcondra, including the Deputy.

What expertise have they got in the airline business?

They were senior people in marketing when they were in employment in a large pharmaceutical multinational company.

Did they have fundraising abilities?

Allow the Taoiseach to conclude, please.

In appointing boards procedures are followed with a view to getting independently minded people who are able to serve competently on the boards. That system works. We do not need an advertising process.

That concludes questions to the Taoiseach. We now move on—

On a point of order, the Taoiseach did not answer my question.

Sorry, Deputy.

Has this Government no commitment to people with disabilities?

Sorry, I did not answer the Deputy's question. There is a commitment to people with disabilities both in employment and in board representation and wherever there are suitable people with disabilities they are appointed.

Top
Share