Enda Kenny
Question:1 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Nally report on the re-organisation of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15543/09]
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Office of the Chief State Solicitor.
As my predecessor indicated to the House on 3 October 2007 and on 8 April 2008 and as I indicated on 12 November 2008 in response to similar questions, the implementation of the relevant recommendations of the Nally report on the re-organisation of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor was completed in 2007.
I welcome the comments of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr. James Hamilton, regarding jury reform. He believed this was an issue of the greatest importance and that there is a need to ensure juries are properly representative of society. Everyone agrees with that. Given the cuts in funding to the Director of Public Prosecutions, the 5% increase in caseloads and initiatives such as giving reasons prosecutions do not proceed, is the Taoiseach satisfied the DPP has sufficient resources to proceed with jury reform?
The DPP stated last weekend it is likely that for some time to come the office will have to attempt to maintain high standards on limited resources. This is a clear warning of the difficulties the DPP is having. Does this give the Taoiseach cause for concern that the DPP does not have the resources to do the job properly?
These questions are on the Office of the Chief State Solicitor, not the DPP.
It deals with the Nally report.
That is to do with the reorganisation of the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. I do not know if the Taoiseach can help Deputy Kenny on the issue of the DPP.
Perhaps the Taoiseach wants to answer the question. Is he happy the DPP has the resources he should have?
I do not know if he can answer because he does not have notice of that.
I will be of as much assistance as I can. When last I dealt with this parliamentary question, there was considerable debate on whether the office of the DPP could deliver the 3% payroll expenditure cut announced last year for 2009 while maintaining services. I can confirm that the DPP has reduced the operating cost of the office through a series of measures without having an adverse impact on frontline prosecution services. Current economic conditions dictate that all public sector organisations must make every effort to reduce operating costs. I am confident the DPP will continue to achieve the best level of service possible from the resources available.
Are there staff in the office of the DPP employed on fixed term contracts? Do the terms of the embargo on renewal of fixed term contracts apply to them?
Some 16 additional staff were approved for the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. Is Deputy Gilmore asking about the DPP?
I refer to both. Are there people on contracts?
The reply refers to the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. Some 16 additional staff were approved for the Office of the Chief State Solicitor in January 2007. The office has an authorised staff level of 249 full-time equivalents. There was a suggestion that some 18 contract staff at the Office of the Chief State Solicitor were to lose their jobs because of the moratorium. However, the Office of the Chief State Solicitor has been in contact with the Department of Finance about extending these contracts. The Department agreed that 16 of them can be extended for varying periods to allow the office to achieve staff reductions and manage its workload on a phased basis. Consideration of any further requests for an extension of contracts will be based on the situation that exists at that time.
With regard to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution, a review of staffing took place in 2006. Arising from that review, 28 extra posts were approved for the office, bringing its staffing complement to 106. The office currently has a serving staff complement of 197, which will rise to 198 shortly when a person already appointed to a vacant post takes up duty.
Regulatory Reform.
Enda Kenny
Question:2 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the recommendation of the OECD report on regulatory reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15544/09]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:3 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the progress made with regard to the recommendations contained in the OECD report on regulatory reform in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16606/09]
Enda Kenny
Question:4 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the OECD report on regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18630/09]
Enda Kenny
Question:5 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the achievements to date of the better regulation project; if he will keep control of the project within his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18628/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:6 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress of regulatory reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20708/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 to 6, inclusive, together.
The OECD report, Regulatory Reform in Ireland, was published in 2001. In response, the Government published the White Paper, Regulating Better, in 2004 which provides the framework for advancing the better regulation agenda in Ireland. Some of the recommendations and actions outlined in the OECD report and the White Paper relate to individual sectors and relevant Ministers are responsible for reporting directly to the House on them.
The better regulation unit in my Department is tasked with the overall promotion of the better regulation agenda across the Government. There are no plans to alter these arrangements. I would like to briefly outline for the House progress made in the areas of regulatory impact analysis and modernisation of the Statute Book.
Since 2005, regulatory impact analysis must be applied to all proposals for primary legislation, significant statutory instruments, draft EU directives and significant regulations. The report of the independent review of the operation of regulatory impact analysis was published in July 2008 and is available on the better regulation website. The Government has agreed to implement the recommendations set out in the report. While many of these recommendations are for individual Departments to implement, the better regulation unit of my Department, in partnership with the network dealing with regulatory impact analysis across Departments, which it chairs, is steering work on a number of overarching recommendations.
Revised guidelines for regulatory impact analysis are expected to be presented to the Government shortly. These guidelines take account of the recommendations set out in the review and address, in particular, the need for improved methodological guidance and for further information on the use of regulatory impact analysis within the context of the EU decision-making process. An updated training course for officials involved in producing such analysis is now available. These training materials reflect the content of the revised guidelines and emphasise the importance of minimising regulatory burdens.
The statute law revision project, which is steered by my Department in partnership with the Office of the Attorney General, has already resulted in the repeal of thousands of redundant and obsolete Acts. The current phase focuses on pre-1922 legislation and a further Bill, dealing with local and personal Acts up to and including 1850 and private Acts up to and including 1750, will be published shortly. Private Acts are those which are concerned with the affairs of a single individual or body, and local and personal Acts are concerned with matters affecting a very limited section of the community such as a single local authority or company.
The Law Reform Commission is also undertaking a programme of statute law restatement involving up to 40 Acts which is expected to be completed by the end of the year. The process of restatement makes legislation more accessible by providing a single text that incorporates all amendments to date.
I understand an interdepartmental committee, chaired by the the Department of the Taoiseach, has been tasked with advancing work in respect of these regulators and regulatory authorities. I understand the report was due to be published in September and was then pushed out to the end of the year. Given the current economic position, this is urgently needed. What is delaying the publication of the report or were its recommendations not suitable, meaning we must go back to the drawing board? The consultancy cost of this report stood at over €300,000 at the end of 2008. What is the current cost?
This regulatory reform is obviously critical. In this and every other city, taxi drivers are complaining that the regulator does not have the staff to implement its duties in keeping people legal on the streets, not to mention the comments on the numbers of taxis. The energy regulator must deal with the issue where prices cannot drop below a floor price. There must be competition for the consumer. Regulatory reform is urgently needed in such areas. When will the report be published, what is delaying it and why can we not see it?
I understand the report, carried out by the Economist Intelligence Unit in partnership with Compecon Limited, commenced in May last year and has recently been completed. The report is currently under consideration by the Government in the context of the overall work programme of the Cabinet committee on economic renewal. The issue of publication will be considered in that context. The cost of the project is approximately €400,000.
I thank the Taoiseach. Does he expect it to be published before the end of the summer or has it appeared on the list for consideration by the Government?
It has not yet been considered by the Government. As I indicated, it has just been completed and referred to the committee. A number of Ministers will consider its contents and see what response the Government has to it. Once we make some decisions in that regard, we can consider publication at that stage.
These questions relate to the OECD report on regulatory reform, which was published in 2001. When that report was published eight years ago, the then Tánaiste and Minister responsible for enterprise and employment, Deputy Harney, said she would accept all the recommendations and that she would have them implemented. From what I can establish, the only recommendation implemented from the report was the abolition of the groceries order. I cannot find much trace of any of the other recommendations being implemented.
For example, there were recommendations on the regulation of the legal professions and very little progress appears to have been made on them. The Competition Authority published an interim report on changes to the professions about two years ago and a final report in December. Aside from reports, there were discussions between the Bar Council and the Competition Authority but there does not appear to have been a great deal of progress in that regard.
What progress is being made on the implementation of the OECD report on regulatory reform? Is the Government still committed to the recommendations in the report and will the Taoiseach update the House on what is happening specifically with regard to regulation of the legal professions, for example?
I do not have the details of the implementation of the report and the fact that it spans a number of Departments, as I indicated in my reply, means it is best to take up the issue with individual Departments. One could then obtain up to date and accurate information on any sectoral recommendations. I do not have that information within my Department.
I am an advocate for a single currency and tax harmonisation across the island of Ireland. Does the Taoiseach recognise that another of the barriers to all-Ireland development, particularly to the development of counties on both sides of the Border, is a differing regulation and employment law in both jurisdictions? Will the Taoiseach examine this issue with a view to harmonising employment law and business regulation on an all-Ireland basis?
Does the Taoiseach agree that the process regarding employment law could commence with the establishment of a working group including the participation of representatives of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Relations Agency in the Six Counties? Does he accept that they, as a working group mandated to approach the project and challenges from an inclusive framework, could move towards bettering the position that currently maintains? Would the Taoiseach also consider a parallel process regarding business regulation?
In the context of our discussions on North-South issues with the Northern Ireland Executive, we continually seek ways and means by which we can improve the business environment both North and South. As a result of different policy issues and structures, we look to ensure that political discussion between relevant Ministers and at North-South Ministerial Council level might be enabled to improve the promotion of trade and the creation of greater business liaison and connection between North and South. InterTrade Ireland has been a good forum for this type of discourse to promote common approaches where it is of mutual benefit. I understand the Deputy's hope of seeing a greater degree of all-Ireland approaches which would be to our mutual benefit. This is an ongoing agenda with the North-South dimension of the agreements. It is important to explore the means by which we could help each other.
There are, however, two different arrangements in place, jurisdictionally, when it comes to labour law and labour-dispute resolution. Obviously, we should always show the benefits of our arrangements and they can show the benefits of theirs so we can devise common approaches to close any gaps in the system. It is an ongoing issue but I do not underestimate some of the difficulties, some structural, some policy, in trying to have greater institutional interaction.
I welcome the Taoiseach's positive response in recognising this problem in the Border counties. Will he accept it has always been more difficult to do business along the Border counties? Businesses there do not have a solid foundation on which to build themselves up given currency fluctuations. Budgetary measures, either from Westminster or the Houses of the Oireachtas, can also destabilise business conditions, resulting in an exodus from North to South or vice versa. Businesses involved in adjacent counties both North and South must grapple with two different sets of bureaucracy and red tape.
Will the Taoiseach accept it is worth exploring the establishment of a working group to examine business regulations and employment laws to make specific recommendations to overcome certain difficulties and work towards their harmonisation for the interest of both jurisdictions on the island of Ireland as a whole? Will he give some indication this morning of a willingness to do this?
That is stretching it a small bit but I call An Taoiseach.
The issue of harmonising employment standards and laws, for example, could involve the reduction of standards on one side of the Border. The social partnership model we have devised over the past 22 years has seen advances in worker and employment legislation. It has been good for us but we must also keep an eye on competitiveness issues. It has not been part of the UK agenda for some time. One issue we have to address, apart from the fluctuation in exchange rates, is the discrepancy in entitlements, benefits, redundancy payments and so forth which we have built up. We are proud to have built them up while others have a different view because of different governmental policies.
I understand the Deputy's sentiment. We need to find a forum to deal with competitiveness issues and avoid distortions in trade. However, it is almost axiomatic that borders are economically disruptive because different rules and regulations apply in the different jurisdictions. I will reflect on what the Deputy said and ask the relevant Department and Minister to advance the issue.
Appointments to State Boards.
Enda Kenny
Question:7 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the appointments made by him since May 2007 to the State boards or other agencies within his aegis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15548/09]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:8 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the appointments made to boards or agencies operating under the aegis of his Department since May 2007 to date in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16607/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:9 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the appointments made by him to State boards since May 2007; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20709/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 9, inclusive, together.
The information sought by the Deputies concerning appointments made by me to State boards and agencies under the aegis of my Department since May 2007 is set out in the following schedule which I propose to circulate in the Official Report.
The agencies in question are the National Economic and Social Council, NESC, the National Economic and Social Forum, NESF, the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, NCPP, the Law Reform Commission and the National Statistics Board.
The members of State bodies under the aegis of my Department are appointed through well-established nominating procedures, having regard both to the remit of the bodies and, consequently, the particular competencies and skills expected of their members. In many instances, the members are nominated through relevant nominating panels. NESC and NESF, for example, comprise representatives of the various pillars involved in social partnership such as employer bodies, trade unions, farming organisations and community and voluntary organisations.
|
Boards |
|
|
1 |
National Economic and Social Council (NESC) |
|
2 |
The National Economic and Social Forum (NESF) |
|
3 |
The National Centre for Partnership and Performance (NCPP) |
|
4 |
The Law Reform Commission |
|
5 |
The National Statistics Board (NSB) |
|
Name |
Dates of Membership |
||
|
Chairperson |
Mr. Dermot McCarthy |
Secretary General, Dept. of the Taoiseach |
June 2007 |
|
Deputy Chair |
Ms. Mary Doyle |
Assistant Secretary, Dept. of the Taoiseach |
June 2007 |
|
Trade Union Pillar |
Mr. David Begg |
General Secretary, ICTU |
June 2007 |
|
Mr. Peter McLoone |
General Secretary, IMPACT |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Manus O’Riordan |
Economist, SIPTU |
June 2007 |
|
|
Ms. Sally Anne Kinahan |
Assistant General Secretary, ICTU |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Jack O’Connor |
Vice President, SIPTU |
June 2007 |
|
|
Business and Employer or Organisation Pillar |
Mr. Turlough O’Sullivan |
Director General, IBEC |
June 2007 |
|
Ms. Siobhan Masterson (replaced Aileen O’Donoghue) |
Director, Financial Services Ireland |
September 2008 |
|
|
Ms. Aileen O’Donoghue |
June 2007 |
||
|
Mr. Danny McCoy |
Director of Policy, IBEC |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. John Dunne |
Chief Executive, Chambers of Commerce Ireland |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Tom Parlon (replaced Liam Kelleher) |
Director General, Construction Industry Federation |
September 2008 |
|
|
Mr. Liam Kelleher |
June 2007 |
||
|
Agricultural and Farming Organisation Pillar |
Mr. Seamus O’Donoghue |
Secretary, ICOS |
June 2007 |
|
Mr. Ciaran Dolan |
General Secretary, ICMSA |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Michael Berkery |
General Secretary, IFA |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Eddie Punch |
General Secretary, ICSA |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Edmond Connolly (replaced Colm Markey) |
Chief Executive Officer, Macra na Féirme |
March 2009 |
|
|
Mr. Colm Markey |
June 2007 |
||
|
Community and Voluntary Pillar |
Fr. Sean Healy |
Head of Justice Office, CORI |
June 2007 |
|
Mr. John Dolan |
Chief Executive, Disability Federation of Ireland |
June 2007 |
|
|
Mr. Séamus Boland |
Chief Executive, Irish Rural Link |
June 2007 |
|
|
Ms. Brid O’Brien |
Senior Policy Officer, Irish National Organisation of the Unemployed |
June 2007 |
|
|
Ms. Camille Loftus |
Community Platform |
June 2007 |
|
|
Government Department Nominees |
Secretary General |
Dept. of Finance |
June 2007 |
|
Secretary General |
Dept. of Enterprise, Trade and Employment |
June 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. of Social and Family Affairs |
June 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government |
June 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. of Education and Science |
June 2007 |
|
|
Independent Nominee |
Dr. Sean Barrett (replaced Colin Hunt) |
Department of Economics, Trinity College |
June 2007 |
|
Mr. Con Lucey |
Economist, IFA |
June 2007 |
|
|
Prof. Peter Clinch (resigned June 2008) |
UCD |
June 2007 |
|
|
Prof. Elizabeth Meehan |
Queen’s University |
June 2007 |
|
|
Oisin Coghlan |
Friends of the Earth |
May 2009 |
|
National Economic and Social Forum (NESF) |
Name |
Occupation / Organisation |
Date of Appointment |
|
Independent Chairperson |
Maureen Gaffney |
May 2007 |
|
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Mary Doyle |
Asst. Sec., Dept. of the Taoiseach |
May 2007 |
|
Strand (i): Oireachtas |
John Curran |
Fianna Fail |
December 07-August 2008 |
|
Michael McGrath |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Cyprian Brady |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Sean Ardagh |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Brian O Domhaill |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Geraldine Feeney |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Marc MacSharry |
Fianna Fail |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Maria Corrigan |
Fianna Fail |
August 2008 (replaced John Curran) |
|
|
Dan Neville |
Fine Gael |
December 07 |
|
|
Terence Flanagan |
Fine Gael |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Paul Coghlan |
Fine Gael |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Jerry Buttimer |
Fine Gael |
December 07 |
|
|
Sean Sherlock |
Labour |
December 07 |
|
|
Willie Penrose |
Labour |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Dan Boyle |
Green |
December 07 |
|
|
Senator Rónán Mullen |
Independents |
December 07 |
|
|
Strand (ii) : Employer/Trade Unions/Farm Organisations |
|||
|
Employer/Business Organisations |
Tony Donohoe |
IBEC |
May 2007 |
|
Danny McCoy |
IBEC |
May 2007 |
|
|
Patricia Callan |
Small Firms Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Dr. Peter Stafford |
Construction Industry Federation |
May 2007 |
|
|
Seán Murphy |
Chambers of Commerce/Tourist Industry/Exporters Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Trade Unions |
Eamon Devoy |
Technical Engineering & Electrical Union |
May 2007 |
|
Blair Horan |
Civil & Public Service Union |
May 2007 |
|
|
Jerry Shanahan |
AMICUS |
May 2007 |
|
|
Manus O’Riordan |
SIPTU |
May 2007 |
|
|
Esther Lynch |
ICTU |
May 2007 |
|
|
Agricultural/Farming Organisations |
Michael Berkery |
Irish Farmers’ Association |
May 2007 |
|
Michael Doody |
Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Emer Duffy |
Irish Co-Operative Organisation Society |
May 2007 |
|
|
Catherine Buckley |
Macra na Feirme |
May 2007 |
|
|
Carmel Dawson |
Irish Country Women’s Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Strand (iii): Community & Voluntary Sector |
Orla O’Connor |
National Women’s Council of Ireland |
May 2007 |
|
Karen Murphy |
Irish Council for Social Housing |
May 2007 |
|
|
Kathleen McCann |
National Congress Centres Network |
May 2007 |
|
|
Sr. Brigid Reynolds |
CORI |
May 2007 |
|
|
John-Mark McCafferty |
Society of Saint Vincent de Paul |
May 2007 |
|
|
Marie Claire McAleer |
National Youth Council of Ireland |
May 2007 |
|
|
Jillian Van Turnhout |
Children’s Rights Alliance |
May 2007 |
|
|
Michael O’Halloran (replaced by Mairéad Hayes in November 2007) |
Irish Senior Citizens Parliament |
May 2007 |
|
|
Joanne McCarthy |
Disability Federation of Ireland |
May 2007 |
|
|
Frank Goodwin |
The Carers Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Seamus Boland |
Irish Rural Link |
May 2007 |
|
|
Frances Byrne |
Community Platform |
May 2007 |
|
|
Ivan Cooper |
The Wheel |
May 2007 |
|
|
Maria Joyce |
National Traveller Womens Forum |
May 2007 |
|
|
Stavros Stavrou |
Integrating Ireland |
May 2007 |
|
|
Strand (iv): Central Government, Local Government and Independents |
|||
|
Central Government |
Secretary General |
Dept. Finance |
May 2007 |
|
Secretary General |
Dept. Enterprise, Trade & Employment |
May 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. Social & Family Affairs |
May 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs |
May 2007 |
|
|
Secretary General |
Dept. the Environment, Heritage & Local Government |
May 2007 |
|
|
Local Government |
Councillor Ger Barron |
General Council of County Councils |
May 2007 |
|
Councillor Constance Hanniffy |
General Council of County Councils |
May 2007 |
|
|
Councillor Mattie Ryan |
Association of County and City Councils |
May 2007 |
|
|
Councillor Paddy O’Callaghan |
Association of Municipal Authorities of Ireland |
May 2007 |
|
|
Councillor William Ireland |
Local Authorities Members Association |
May 2007 |
|
|
Independents |
Prof Colm Harmon |
UCD Geary Institute |
May 2007 |
|
Prof Mary P. Corcoran |
NUI Maynooth |
May 2007 |
|
|
Cait Keane |
South Dublin County Council |
May 2007 (resigned November 2008) |
|
|
Prof Rose Ann Kenny |
Trinity College Dublin |
May 2007 |
|
|
Marie Carroll |
Southside Partnership |
May 2007 |
|
Appointments to the NCPP Council |
Replaced |
Occupation/ Organisation |
Date of Appointment |
|
|
Government Departments |
Mr. Brendan Duffy, Asst. Secretary |
Ciaran Connolly (who was appointed in October 2001 and reappointed in January 2006) |
Dept. of Finance |
10 July 2008 |
|
Mr. Dermot Curran, Asst. Secretary |
Mr. John Walsh, (appointed in June 2002 {replaced Mr. Maurice Cashell} and reappointed in January 2006) |
Dept. of Enterprise, Trade & Employment |
10 July 2008 |
|
|
Employers |
Ms. Mary Connaughton |
Mr. Gavin Marie ({replaced Mr. Liam Doherty in April 2007} appointed in October 2001 and reappointed 24 January 2006) |
HR Development, IBEC |
10 July 2008 |
|
Name |
Occupation |
Date of Appointment |
|
|
Commissioner (Full-time) |
Patricia T. Rickard-Clarke, |
Solicitor |
Reappointed 1 September 2007 |
|
Commissioner (Part-time) |
Professor Finbarr McAuley, B.C.L., LLB, Mphil, LLD, |
Jean Monnet Professor of European Criminal Justice, UCD |
Reappointed 1 September 2007 |
|
Commissioner (Part-time) |
Marian Shanley |
Solicitor |
Reappointed 1 September 2007 |
|
Senior Counsel (Part-time) |
Donal O’Donnell |
Senior Counsel |
Reappointed 1 September 2007 |
|
Name |
Occupation |
Date of Appointment |
|
|
Chairperson |
Dr. Patricia O’Hara |
Western Development Commission |
March, 2009 (originally appointed to the Board in July, 2007) |
|
Professor emeritus Brendan Walsh (former Chair) |
Professor, UCD |
July, 2007 (resigned February, 2009) |
|
|
Taoiseach Nominee |
Professor Philip Lane |
Trinity College, Dublin |
March, 2009 |
|
Government Departments |
Ms. Mary Doyle |
Department of the Taoiseach |
July, 2007 |
|
Mr. Michael McGrath |
Department of Finance |
July, 2007 |
|
|
Trade Union Pillar |
Mr. Paul Sweeney |
ICTU |
July, 2007 |
|
Farming Pillar |
Mr. Con Lucey |
IFA |
July, 2007 |
|
Business Pillar |
Mr. Danny McCoy |
IBEC |
July, 2007 |
|
Ex Officio Members |
Mr. Donal Garvey (former member) |
Director General, CSO |
July, 2007 (the Director General of the CSO is as an ex officio member of the NSB, therefore Donal Garvey’s membership effectively ceased when Gerry O’Hanlon was appointed as Director General of the CSO in August 2007) |
|
Mr. Gerry O’Hanlon |
Director General, CSO |
August, 2007 |
All eight positions on the NSB are currently filled. The gender balance on the board is six males to two females. The current chair of the NSB is female.
Fine Gael recently published its public appointments transparency Bill. The Taoiseach's predecessor was of the mind to have some involvement from the Oireachtas in the appointment of chairpersons to important State bodies and agencies. It would not have been so much an interrogation role but an interactive one, inquiring as to the qualities, experience and difference appointees would make to particular boards. He said it might be useful to give some thought to involving committees of the House in the appointments to some boards. Does the Taoiseach share that view?
Any appointment will obviously come under scrutiny. Regardless of whoever is in government, any appointee will be labelled, whether it be true or not, as a hack or a crony. The same applied when the Fine Gael Party was in government. To deal with public cynicism about appointments to State bodies, there is merit in having some involvement from Oireachtas committees. Does the Taoiseach consider the principle of the public appointments transparency Bill as important? Does he believe it might be appropriate to have appointees explain to an Oireachtas committee their credentials and why they wish to take up the offer?
I am not acquainted with the Bill to which the Deputy referred.
I will send the Taoiseach a copy.
I thank the Deputy and I look forward to receiving it.
People are appointed to State boards on the basis of the competencies and knowledge they can bring to the work. These are non-executive appointments. We need good people for public service. We should base our views of their work, in whatever role they are asked to take up, objectively on the basis of their performance. As the Deputy said, some times a judgmental approach is taken by some regarding an appointment rather than watching their performance in implementing public policy or the commercialisation agenda which the bodies are mandated to do under statute. It is important that the appointment of people to State boards is not met with the usual knee-jerk reaction but based on an objective assessment on their work.
I have never, in either my ministerial experience or as Taoiseach, sought to appoint people purely on the basis of whether I know them personally, which incidentally is not a disqualification, or whether they have party affiliation but on what competencies they bring to the job. I can cite many instances in which I have had no problem in re-appointing people from predecessors' Administrations or in appointing people who may not be obviously of my party political faith. That is not relevant and certainly is not essential in the context of appointing people to boards. It is important that boards have credibility and are peopled by appointees who have a contribution to make and who can bring to play particular skills. One issue that arises is to ensure there are sufficient people available for such appointments and I do not believe in politicising the appointment process in that respect. Ministers have roles to appoint, usually on the basis of advice given as to suitable people for consideration, and it is incumbent on all Ministers in their appointments to ensure that such appointments are seen to be credible and are of people of character who can be depended on to display the proper ethical standards.
What progress in respect of gender balance has been made with regard to appointments to the various boards? The aim of the Government is to have male and female representation of at least 40% on each board. My recollection is that when the Minister for Defence, who is sitting beside the Taoiseach, was a Minister of State with responsibility in this area, he suggested that he might introduce legislation to ensure this would happen, had it not happened voluntarily within a period of six months. As I believe that was the best part of a decade ago, what progress has been made in this regard? Is a mechanism in operation whenever someone is being appointed to a State board to ensure the issue of gender balance is considered before such an appointment is made?
I will outline the current gender breakdown of all the bodies under the aegis of my Department, distinguishing between direct appointees and nominations. As for the National Statistics Board, there are five male and one female direct appointees, as well as one male and one female nominee. The Law Reform Commission is formed by nomination and there are two male and three female nominees. On the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, there are three female and one male direct appointees and eight male and three female nominees. On the National Economic and Social Council, there are three male and one female direct appointees, as well as 19 male and eight female nominees. Finally, the National Economic and Social Forum has seven female and four male direct appointees and 33 male and 17 female nominees. These figures will provide the Deputy with an indication. A problem in respect of nominations is the surprising inability of some sources to provide female representation, given their broad policy positions on many of these areas.
While I appreciate the questions under discussion do not refer to the Taoiseach's tenure in that office alone, within the two-year period since the general election of 2007, have any former Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas been included in any of those appointments over the two years?
In my Department?
Are any such appointees former Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas? Do former Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas sit on any agencies or boards that are under the direct aegis of the Department of the Taoiseach?
I have asked numerous times, and other voices have echoed the same sentiments, whether the Taoiseach has given further consideration to an open, competitive and transparent application process for positions arising on the boards of any agencies or boards under the direct remit of his Department. Does the Taoiseach not accept there is a great wealth of experience, interest and willingness to serve in such positions across the community that will not register in the consideration of a closed approach on the part of whoever within any given Department is entrusted with examining the pool from which such names are drawn? Does the Taoiseach not accept this issue merits revisitation and that this tremendous untapped resource must be opened up to State service in these respective institutions?
Personally, I invite anyone who feels he or she has something to offer by appointment to a board to contact my office at any time.
They should write to the Taoiseach——
Such people should write to me, let me know and send me their curricula vitae.
——and send their curricula vitae.
Exactly. It genuinely is important that the Government should know who is available and, by definition, one must search to find people. Some organisations have indicated their preferences through directories and others have sent lists of people for consideration. Such people are considered and some are appointed. It is difficult, however, to set out a form of bureaucratic system of assessment of this matter. It is a question of finding people, depending on the business of the organisation, to establish a good and balanced non-executive board that will work with the executive and will have the ability to think strategically about the future of such organisations, on how best they should be managed and what they should be doing. Moreover, they should be working within broad Government policy, if not direction. They cannot do their own thing regardless as they must work to a consistent policy framework. However, allowing for that, important functions of a board include the need to show initiative, fresh thinking and the ability to change and adapt the roles of such organisations, which sometimes would require subsequent ministerial or Cabinet approval, and consequently people of ability are needed on them. Regardless of whether they are commercial boards or simply are boards that are charged with delivering services or when public moneys are involved, the governance of such organisations obviously is important and the job must be done properly and competently. Where it is not done, the Government must be prepared to move on and reshape these boards.
For example, I refer to the recent controversy that arose in respect of FÁS. That organisation, its board and the composition thereof must be changed and adapted and must move on. An important aspect of governance arrangements is to show that the board should be changed, or certainly that the idea of simply nominating from various bodies regardless is not necessarily the most dynamic means of achieving the valid and legitimate objectives as originally set out.
An important aspect of ministerial work is to be acquainted with people who serve on such boards, to be in touch with them, to listen and talk to them, to be in contact with them to ascertain what they are doing and to ensure they are in line with overall Government objectives and that work is being conducted in an appropriate and proper fashion. This is an ongoing task and discipline that must be considered all the time. As for membership or prospective membership, I issue a genuine invitation to all those who feel they have a contribution to make and who are motivated by public service to apprise Departments, organisations or Ministers accordingly.
Perhaps the Taoiseach does not have the information immediately to hand, but if he does, can he advise Members whether former Members of the Houses of the Oireachtas have been appointed since the general election of 2007 to any of the aforementioned boards or agencies? Are any former Members of either House of the Oireachtas serving on any bodies directly under the remit of the Department of the Taoiseach at present?
I will provide this information to the Deputy. Offhand, I am unaware whether former Oireachtas Members are serving on the boards of the aforementioned agencies. I reiterate that former Oireachtas Members can, in certain circumstances, be highly valuable members of boards, depending on the activities in which the boards are engaged.
I find the Taoiseach's comments difficult to accept. I point out to him that to use "governance" in the same sentence as "the board of FÁS" is a contradiction in terms. It is certainly not one of the areas to which I would allude if I were to speak about improving governance, transparency and accountability in this country.
Arising from that contribution, I presume the Deputy's view is that he does not want any changes arising from what happened in FÁS.
That is facetiousness beyond the Taoiseach's——
The facetiousness emanated from the Deputy's bench.
We all know of the Taoiseach's backing for the man in charge of FÁS.
Whatever that is supposed to mean.
Standards in Public Office.
Enda Kenny
Question:10 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he has plans to amend the code of conduct for office holders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15550/09]
Eamon Gilmore
Question:11 Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he has plans to amend the code of conduct for office holders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15594/09]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:12 Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if it is planned to amend the code of conduct for office holders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20710/09]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 to 12, inclusive, together.
The code of conduct for office holders was drawn up by the Government pursuant to section 10(2) of the Standards in Public Office Act 2001, following consultation with the Standards in Public Office Commission, and was published in July 2003. Deputies will be aware that the Ethics in Public Office (Amendment) Bill 2007 provides for changes to the ethics framework. A review of the code will be carried out, in consultation with the Standards in Public Office Commission, after that Bill has been enacted.
Is the Taoiseach satisfied that all members of the Cabinet are in compliance with the code of conduct? Have any complaints been received in respect of allegations of Ministers stepping outside or being in breach of the code? Is a copy of the updated version of the code of conduct available in the Oireachtas Library for perusal?
I am not aware of any problems of compliance with the code of conduct by any office holders — certainly, none has been brought to my attention. The code of conduct was published in 2003 and the review of the code will be carried out when it becomes available after the Ethics in Public Office (Amendment) Bill has been enacted.
The jailing yesterday of former Government press secretary, Frank Dunlop, was a very significant watershed in Irish life, in particular in regard to the corruption of public office. Has the Taoiseach given consideration to the consequences and any changes in legislation, practices or codes of conduct that might be progressed arising from the decision of the court yesterday?
No, I have not given any consideration to that matter.
With regard to the code of conduct, and without sight of the most up-to-date text of same, is there a clear indication to Ministers and Ministers of State of their duties and responsibilities to other Members of these Houses? I speak specifically regarding their responsibility to respond to either parliamentary questions or written representations. I am reflecting particularly on a delay of a long period of months in receiving replies from some Ministries and front-line Ministers. The code of conduct must go beyond the required high standards in terms of public office vis-à-vis the matters referred to by the previous speaker. Surely, it must also require of office an awareness and an adherence to the best standards in terms of their accountability and responsibility to the Houses of the Oireachtas. Will the Taoiseach indicate if this area is addressed within the code of conduct and, if not, what steps he would consider employing to guarantee to Members that we will be accorded the expected courtesy and, I believe, essential response from Ministers in regard to the representations and inquiries we make?
What the Deputy refers to is the need for good public administration and that there be good administration practices in Departments, agencies and among Ministers so there is an efficient relaying of information upon request by colleagues in the Oireachtas in respect of any policy or other issues that arise, such as constituency matters. While it is not part of the code of conduct, it is obviously something office holders would be expected to be able to discharge. I will bring to the attention of colleagues the need to ensure that is in place.
I welcome that because I have personal experience of a period of months passing without even the courtesy of an acknowledgement in a couple of cases from front line Ministers, which I find incredible. It is not representative of the position adopted by the vast number of front line Ministers and I would be remiss in not making that point. The reality is that the overwhelming number are most attentive and respond within appropriate timeframes, but there are exceptions. From inquiries I have made, I understand it is not unique to my representations and inquiries because there are similar experiences. It is worth addressing on a cross-party basis within the front line Ministries in this current coalition arrangement.
If the Deputy brings to my attention certain matters, I will follow them up.
Given the awful matters referred to in the Ryan report, I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, is present and seated behind the Taoiseach, who also has an interest in this area. Everyone welcomed the introduction of standards in regard to institutions where people with special needs and disabilities are living——
This concerns the code of conduct for office holders.
This is about the conduct of office.
It is a strange starting point.
Introducing standards is useless unless they are on a statutory footing and are enforceable, and unless inspectors are put in place. That concerns the conduct of office holders, which is a very significant element. When will we see this? With regard to legislation on whistleblowers, for example, which concerns conduct in high places, we automatically assume whistleblowers are people in banks or other financial institutions. What about those who report abuse and do not have protection? As someone who reported abuse, I can report that the same social worker who was supposed to have been looking after the case——
I do not like to cut off the Deputy but this concerns office holders in the context of Government.
——then went to the family and told them I had reported it. The man came to my door.
We are wandering off the subject.
I was just lucky.
It is an important issue.
So it is.
We know all that. I have to operate under Standing Orders.
What frightens me about this is not so much the misfortunate man coming to my door——
We must move on.
——it is that the same social worker is now promoted and in charge of child care in the HSE southern region.
I cannot talk about social workers under this question. The Deputy has made her point.
That frightens me.
This relates to office holders in the context of Government.
In terms of the statutory standing of the inspectorate of institutions for people with special needs and disabilities——
If the Deputy wishes to put down a question in regard to the matters——
——when will we see that?
That is not relevant to this question, to be fair. The Deputy will have to put down a separate question.