Gerry Adams
Question:1 Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his role regarding public service reform; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6578/11]
Ceisteanna — Questions
Croke Park Agreement
Micheál Martin
Question:2 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach his engagement with the implementation of the Croke Park deal. [6653/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
Through the implementation of the commitments in the programme for Government, this Government will introduce the most ambitious programme of public service reform since the foundation of the State. Public service reform is a central priority for the Government and for me personally and that is why I have appointed a senior Minister with full cabinet responsibility for that agenda. It is our objective to have a leaner, more effective and better value for money public service, something which is in the interests of everyone in this country.
The cost of delivering public services must be reduced further and this will be done through the planned reduction in public service numbers and through greater efficiencies in the way in which public services are delivered. The reform programme, including the highly significant comprehensive spending review, will be led by the Minister, Deputy Brendan Howlin, and Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes. Of course, it is the responsibility of all Ministers to ensure the public service reform programme is implemented with energy and commitment in their Departments and sectors.
The Government intends to use the full potential of the Croke Park agreement to support the reform programme and to deliver greater flexibility, redeployment and changed work practices. We must have full implementation of the many commitments to efficiency and reform in the agreement and, notwithstanding progress to date, it is clear that the pace of change under the agreement needs to be accelerated in order that savings can by achieved and services delivered more effectively, with significantly reduced staff numbers and a stronger focus on the citizen.
In terms of the future role of my Department, at present the public service modernisation division of the Department is involved in a wide range of work in the public service reform area, including implementation of the Croke Park agreement, the senior public service and the organisational review programme, to mention just a few areas. Arrangements to transfer the functions and staff of this division to the new Department of Public Expenditure and Reform once it has been formally established are being finalised. In the meantime, the division is continuing its work in close co-operation with its counterparts in the public service management and development division in the Department of Finance.
In conclusion, I plan to maintain a very strong interest in the public service reform programme and I will chair a Cabinet committee of all the relevant Ministers to oversee the Government's programme in this important area. I look forward to working closely with Deputy Howlin and others in this regard. Deputies may be assured that public service reform will be kept firmly at the centre of this Government's thinking and its actions and I look forward to real progress being delivered in the near future.
Sinn Féin supports efficiency and an end to waste and bureaucracy in all sectors, including the public sector. Would the Taoiseach agree that reform and productivity can and should be achieved in co-operation with workers' representatives and not through threats of payoffs? We have the shameful position of Labour Party Ministers speaking about the consequences for public service workers, pay cuts and so on.
Nuair a chuir mé ceist ar an Taoiseach níos luaithe, bhí mé ag lorg freagra soiléir mar chuir mé ceist shoiléir. Tá mé ag cur cúpla ceist shoiléir arís anois. When will the spending review be completed? Will there also be consequences, in terms of pay cuts, for those at the top of the scale? What level of cuts is the Taoiseach seeking from this process?
On the spending review, we have set in place a process and agreed it. It will be completed by September or October. Each Minister will have examined the sections and sectors in his or her Department in respect of a review of how the money was effectively spent, which will feed into the preparation of the budget for 2012. As the Deputy is aware, the Government has signed on for fiscal targets which simply have to be achieved and that is the reason why, for the first time ever, we will have this scale of comprehensive analysis of what spending actually takes place. The spending review will not examine the presentation of the budget for 2012. Rather, it will examine the effectiveness of how moneys Voted to Departments and Ministries for this year are actually being spent.
This is an agreement that has been made, signed off on and voted on in the House. I made it perfectly clear that when the Croke Park agreement was put together that we respected its public pay element. As the Deputy is aware, the IMF and EU deal sets out certain conditions that simply have to be achieved. Ministers who have been pointing out the reality of that are talking about what is in the conditions which were signed off on by the previous Government and the EU and IMF.
On my question on the Croke Park agreement, the Taoiseach seems to preface everything by trying to blame others. The bottom line is whether he agrees with the assertion of the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, that if the Croke Park agreement does not deliver the required savings the option that will be chosen will be a further cut in the pay of public servants.
In terms of the spending review, is the Taoiseach not aware that a comprehensive review of public spending exists, namely, the report of the economist Colm McCarthy, known as the an bord snip review? It is quite comprehensive and provides a wide range of options to Ministers and the Government to get on with, rather than kicking the can down the road to September. The Government has accepted the €6 billion budget which was introduced last year by the outgoing Government. The current Government described it as "savage" but accepted it and the parameters of cuts of €3 billion for next year.
Given the growth rates are not materialising it is very clear there may need to be adjustments to that figure. The key question is whether the Taoiseach accepts the assertion of the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, in terms of cuts in public service pay. Would the Taoiseach accept there has already been a comprehensive spending review?
The Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, and others are merely pointing out that a condition of the IMF and EU deal is that if by the appropriate date the terms of the agreement have not been delivered there will have to be some consequences. It is not a threat, it is a reality. While some savings have been achieved, it is an agreement that needs to be accelerated. It was signed off on and has been difficult to accept for some people, but it is an agreement that is in place. We want to see it implemented in full.
We do not want to see a situation whereby the consequences for numbers or pay are forced upon us. That will not be necessary if the agreement is delivered on in full. That is why the pace of change and the delivery of more effective services needs to be accelerated.
I asked if there were consequences and pay cuts for those at the very top of the scale. The Labour Party Minister and the Taoiseach have repeated that there will be consequences. A lot of the people involved are low paid workers who provide front-line services which are essential for the welfare of citizens and those who are vulnerable. Once again we are told this is to satisfy the IMF and EU.
There is waste as well as huge salaries at the top of the public service. Mar a dúirt mé cúpla uair, tá mé ag lorg freagra soiléir. Will there also be consequences for those at the very top? Will they include capping their salaries? Will pay cuts also be introduced?
Given the concerns of the Taoiseach about the pace of the implementation of the agreement and flexibilities to be achieved, has he met the leaders of the public service unions and ICTU in regard to the Croke Park agreement?
No, I have not met them yet. Deputy Howlin has met the implementation body. I will be able to meet them in due course. Under the public service agreement, the position on public service pay must be reviewed on an annual basis and this will happen before 30 June. This will take account of sustainable savings generated from the implementation of the agreement. The agreement states that in the event of sufficient savings being identified in the spring 2011 review, priority in pay will be given to public servants with pay rates of €35,000 or less. There is recognition of the stress in that. The EU-IMF programme states that by the end of the third quarter of 2011, the Government "will consider an appropriate adjustment, including in the overall public service wage bill, to compensate for potential shortfalls in the projected savings arising from administrative efficiencies and public service number reductions." That is in the agreement and that is why it is necessary everybody understands that this is an agreement that simply must be effectively implemented. That is why it must be speeded up.
Does the Taoiseach agree that public sector reform and the Croke Park agreement are really a crude cover for cutting thousands of jobs in the public sector? Does he agree that this will have severely damaging effects? The OECD stated just a few years ago that we had a small public sector compared with many other EU countries. How does he feel about this disgraceful blackmailing by Labour Party Ministers, who are threatening more wage cuts on low and middle income workers, while his Government does not introduce cuts for gambling billionaire bondholders?
The Taoiseach stated just a few minutes ago that public sector reform must result in significantly reduced staff numbers. Is he aware that the reduction of numbers in the health service has already put intolerable pressure on staff members delivering the service and a deterioration in the quality of service to the community? How does that square with the Government putting a potential €70 billion into banks to cover the debts of bondholders?
I will allow a very short supplementary question from Deputy Boyd Barrett and then I will move on.
Apart from the injustice of visiting pay cuts on low and middle income public sector workers, what about the economic irrationality of it? If the Government takes money out of the pockets of ordinary workers who spend in the economy, it has a detrimental effect because demand is reduced and the economy contracts. The only public sector reform we should examine is one that deals with excessively high salaries of those paid with public money, whether it is in the top end of the Civil Service, semi-State bodies, politicians or bankers. These are the people who should take the hit, rather than ordinary low and middle income workers who have already been slaughtered with pay cuts.
The OECD produces a myriad of reports, some of which are very detailed and are of value in their own right. This country is in serious difficulty and we must provide a more efficient and effective public service with smaller numbers. That is not to decry the heroic efforts of many people in the public service who strive constantly to deliver the best service in very trying conditions. I speak particularly of those in the health, education and justice areas.
The European Union had no interest in making subordinated bondholders share the burden, but that has now happened. The Government has made it quite clear that bondholders in Anglo Irish Bank and Irish Nationwide Building Society are in a different category to those in the two pillar banks of AIB and Bank of Ireland. To answer Deputy Boyd Barrett's comments about high earners, taxation levels and levies hit all earners. The universal social charge is something that the Government will review in its preparation for the 2012 budget.
The planned reduction of between 18,000 and 21,000 in public service numbers by 2014 is through voluntary redundancy only. The human resource manager of the HSE stated some time ago that 700 people could do the jobs of the 2,000 personnel in one sector, which is why there was such a take up in such a short time of the offer of voluntary redundancy by the HSE. This is necessary to achieve a more cost effective, down-sized public service. That is not easy for many people, but unfortunately it must be done.
Departmental Correspondence
Gerry Adams
Question:3 Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if the communications unit still operates in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6581/11]
Micheál Martin
Question:4 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the arrangements he has put in place to give himself and others reports concerning media coverage. [6664/11]
Micheál Martin
Question:5 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he plans to maximise the use of www.merrionstreet.ie in view of comments (details supplied). [6847/11]
Micheál Martin
Question:6 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach his plans to review the work of the communications unit in his Department. [7505/11]
Micheál Martin
Question:7 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the role to be played by him in seeking to secure and retain inward investment as distinct from the role of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation. [7690/11]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 7, inclusive, together.
I have no plans to review the work of the communications unit. There has been no change in the work of the unit and it continues to provide news updates and transcripts to the Government press office, Departments and my Department. Consequently the arrangements in place for me and my Department for updates on media coverage remain the same.
The Government press office staffing arrangements have not been finalised yet. The Government press office currently has extra responsibilities in dealing with the considerable international media presence for the forthcoming visits of the Queen and President Obama. The outgoing Government press secretary was asked to stay on for a period of transition. The Tánaiste has indicated that Ms Cathy Madden will be his appointee as a deputy Government press secretary. Ms Joanne Lonergan will also be contracted to the Government information services.
There have been no other staff changes to date, and the working arrangements of the Government press office have not changed. The Government press office and the Government information service provide an information service on Government policy to the public through the national and international media on my behalf, on behalf of my Department and the Government and they promote a co-ordinated approach to media matters across all Departments.
The website www.merrionstreet.ie was developed and launched by the previous Government. Its purpose is to provide citizens with a single on-line location where the activity of the Government can be viewed. As it did in the previous Administration, www.merrionstreet.ie reports this activity in an impartial and factual manner. The latest press releases from all Departments are available on the site, which over time will be a valuable archive of Government information. Its main purpose is to make the work of the Government more accessible to citizens by reporting Government news in a user friendly manner, using audio-visual tools and Internet capabilities, including YouTube, Flickr, Facebook and Twitter.
Do we need such a service at all? We have a Government press office and each Department has its own press officers. Are all of the people in this communications unit civil servants?
The Taoiseach mentioned the Queen in his reply. Which queen did he have in mind?
Your Queen.
The Queen of England, as the Deputy is aware, is to visit the country. This is the first time in more than 100 years that a reigning monarch is to come to Ireland.
She has been to Belfast many times.
She paid the Deputy's salary.
She is coming at the invitation of our President and this is a symbol of two countries growing up. I am glad it is happening and that is who I refer to.
The response to both the questions on the communications unit and on www.merrionstreet.ie are a remarkable illustration of the U-turn the Government has taken on many issues. Let us take the example of the communications unit. The Taoiseach’s response is a classic example of the cynical approach he took when he was on the Opposition benches. He attacked that unit for nine years and accused it of being at the heart of a political operation, and now he is reversing his position. Does he not accept that comments he made in regard to the communications unit were ill-advised and ill-informed while he was the Leader of the Opposition?
In terms of www.merrionstreet.ie would the Taoiseach not now ask the Tánaiste to withdraw the remarks he made in regard to that website on its introduction when he said in the Dáil on 12 October that there was a distinction between information and propaganda, and that this was a propaganda site? The Taoiseach has described it as impartial and objective here this morning and I welcome that turnaround since he also criticised www.merrionstreet.ie. It illustrates the cynicism of his approach when he was on the Opposition benches, which is bad for politics——
This is Question Time.
It is a very poor basis for a new type of politics.
I used to criticise this on the basis that all Departments had their own press operations, and the question arose as to whether this site was running contrary to what was happening in all the Departments. I have not had time to visit the personnel there yet. I have clicked onto the site at one stage and it is presenting factual information in respect of the Government. All the Government's statements are available on the site for all citizens both at home and abroad. From that viewpoint I accept that it is giving out factual information.
I appreciate the Taoiseach's confirmation that it was never and is not a propaganda site.
I would not call it cynical.
Can the Taoiseach elaborate on how many people work in the communications unit? Could he say exactly what they do in terms of keeping the Government informed as regards what is going on in the media? Is it the case that every Minister gets a file of coverage from the main newspapers every day in regard to his or her activities and that of the Government, and what exactly do they do?
With regard to the press arrangements to which the Taoiseach referred surrounding the visit of the Queen of England, how will the fact that we are spending a fortune in entertainment for a visit by the relic of a feudal monarchy, which is long past its "sell by" date, sit with the citizens of this State, which is supposed to be a republic?
That question would be appropriate as a supplementary. Would the Taoiseach like to reply to the main points?
The Government Information Service, GIS, has three functions: to provide a press and information service for the Taoiseach as Head of Government and his Department; to deal with press and media issues for the Government as a whole, arising from that as a collective authority; and to co-ordinate the work of departmental media services in the interests of efficiency, such as the provision of Government representatives for media events, where appropriate.
The departmental press officers deal with queries relating to their specific areas of responsibility, but not issues involving interdepartmental responsibilities. The current GIS has grown from the early days when there were only two major national broadsheets and one national broadcaster to today's media involving 24 hour coverage and instant access to information from news wires and websites around the world. Today's information from the Government can be released via paper press releases, e-mails, text messages, podcasts and webcasts, to name some of the new technologies, not that I am familiar with the workings of all of them.
The scheduled visits of the Queen of England and the American President are by two very high profile international figures and there is a cost associated with security, media arrangements and so on. However, as somebody who comes from Daingean Uí Chúis, the Deputy will understand that this is an investment in terms of business and tourism potential, and should be seen as such. We welcome both visitors to our shores and hope that the Irish people will give them a very warm welcome. It is a sign of a country having grown up, on the one hand, while on the other it is a question of looking to the future with an American President who speaks to young people all over the world about hope, liberty and confidence and what it is to be part of a country such as this, facing the challenges we do as part of the international community.
I, too, have a question for the Taoiseach in terms of media co-ordination and roles within the Department. Is the Taoiseach in a position to outline details of the permanent structure to be put in place for the GIS? With regard the replies, which are quite comprehensive, it is very clear that "Sir Humphrey" has been hard at work in terms of ensuring members of the Government were all converted in terms of the importance of the communications unit, www.merrionstreet.ie and so on.
I concur with the Taoiseach on the Queen's visit. It is a very important event, which I believe illustrates the transformation in relationships between this country and Great Britain. We have received heads of state from all over the world. As a former Minister for Foreign Affairs I actively encouraged such a visit. I am delighted it is taking place and I believe it illustrates the journey we have collectively travelled on this island and between the two islands. It reflects that and hopefully will usher in a new era in terms of our further relations.
I commend Deputy Martin for his forthrightness in promoting this when he was Minister for Foreign Affairs, and I am very glad that towards the end of her presidency, President McAleese issued the invitation to Buckingham Palace, which was accepted by the Queen. I acknowledge the Deputy's interest in this during his time as Minister.
I do not as yet have the details regarding the permanent set-up in respect of the GIS. I do not envisage that there will be any great changes, but in the event, I shall let the Deputy know.
I do not wish to correct the Taoiseach's grasp of geography, but clearly sections of the establishment here do not have a strong grasp of geography. This may be the first visit of the Queen of England to this State, but she has come to the country, particularly that part the President comes from, many times.
This is the first visit of a reigning British monarch to the Twenty-six Counties of the Republic of Ireland in more than 100 years. As the Deputy is well aware, it is the conclusion of a long period, and is a demonstration of this country having grown up that the President of Ireland and the Queen of England can meet here. The symbolism of that is extraordinary and shows, in many ways, an end to a long separation. The Queen comes to our shores as a welcome visitor, to a country with a proud history and record, facing the challenges of the future with a great potential.
Government Economic Management Council
Micheál Martin
Question:8 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the names of all persons appointed to assist the Government Economic Management Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6654/11]
The Government Economic Management Council has been established with the status of a Cabinet committee. The secretariat is currently provided by existing members of staff in my Department, working in close conjunction with representatives of the Department of Finance and the Department of Foreign Affairs.
It has been decided to create a new post of second Secretary General in the Department of the Taoiseach to support the work of the council. He or she will also play a lead role in European Union co-ordination, supporting the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste as appropriate. Expressions of interest in the post have been sought and I expect that an appointment will be made shortly.
I support the appointment of a second Secretary General to the Department of the Taoiseach. This has been warranted for some time and it is a necessary appointment, particularly in terms of both the economic and European sides. Given the role of the Economic Management Council, will the Taoiseach confirm, as outlined to the House, that we will be able to ask questions about its work and that no effort will be made to shield it behind the status of a Cabinet committee?
Over recent days, we have witnessed a string of Ministers engaging in media appearances and using them to explain that economic documents are either before Government or due to come before Government in the near future. Given that Cabinet confidentiality does not seem to extend to media briefings, will the Taoiseach ensure the House has the same right as the media to ask questions about the work of his Department and in particular the work of the Economic Management Council?
I would very much regret it were there any comments from within Cabinet. The Deputy is well aware that the confidentiality of discussions at Cabinet and Cabinet sub-committees is protected by Article 28.4.3o of the Constitution, which states:
The confidentiality of discussions at meetings of the Government shall be respected in all circumstances save only where the High Court determines that disclosure should be made in respect of a particular matter—
i in the interests of the administration of justice by a Court, or
ii by virtue of an overriding public interest, pursuant to an application in that behalf by a tribunal appointed by the Government or a Minister of the Government on the authority of the Houses of the Oireachtas to inquire into a matter stated by them to be of public importance.
The Deputy is aware that is the situation in so far as the Constitution is concerned with regard to speaking in respect of Cabinet committees. However, that is not to say that the general discussions we can have here in a changed situation in the House cannot refer to the broader issues rather than the actual work of the Cabinet committees.
I will send the Deputy a list of the Cabinet committees that were authorised and will provide for the information of the House. The work of those committees can be discussed in general in discussions in the Dáil. However, as the Deputy is aware from experience at Cabinet committees, members are bound by the Constitution on confidentiality from talking about the actual issues discussed.
Clearly, Sir Humphrey was very hard at work yesterday preparing these responses and has covered all bases effectively. Under the programme for Government, the Taoiseach has given himself a role in terms of strategic economic co-ordination and has set up an important economic management council. Therefore, in the general sense, we should have the facility to ask questions in terms of strategic direction and economic policy and the decisions taken by the council.
As Leader of the Opposition, the Deputy has every right to raise issues on Leaders' Questions and I have a duty to respond as best I can. The Economic Management Council will deal with economic planning and budgetary matters, with the economic recovery programme, including the representation of Ireland internationally in negotiations with the EU, the ECB, the IMF and the troika, the integration of the work of Departments and agencies and the co-ordination of banking policy. The Deputy has asked questions about these issues already. The council has met ten times to date, on 10, 15, 21, 23, 28, 29 and 31 March and on 4, 5 and 11 April, reflecting the seriousness of the issues with which it must deal and the decisions to be made by Government as a consequence.
Tá a fhios agam go bhfuil mé ag cur isteach ar an Taoiseach mar go bhfuil mé ag lorg eolais. Ní féidir liom eolas a fháil uaidh nuair a chuirim mo cheisteanna i mBéarla agus mar sin cuirfidh mé an cheist faoin ábhar seo i nGaeilge. Cé hiad na daoine ar an gcomhairle seo? Cé hé an cathaoirleach? An bhfuil nasc idir an comhairle seo agus an IMF, EU agus an ECB?
Is iad na polaiteoirí atá ag freastal ar an gcomhairle seo ná mé féin agus an Tánaiste, an t-Aire Airgeadais, an Teachta Michael Noonan, agus an t-Aire Airgeadais Caiteachas Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe, an Teachta Brendan Howlin. Tá oifigigh ón Roinn ag freastal, mar is gnáth, ar na coistí seo chomh maith, ach ní dóigh liom gur ceart a n-ainmneacha a lua mar gheall ar cibé eolas speisialta atá acu.
I noticed Deputy Martin was very complimentary to Sir Humphrey this morning. I suppose that is because——
I ask the Deputy to refrain from mentioning Sir Humphrey and remind Deputies that questions are asked of the Taoiseach and Ministers. Responses are given by Ministers, not Sir Humphrey.
Sir Humphrey had 14 years of good practice under Deputy Martin's party.
He no longer exists as far as I am concerned.
Did I understand the Taoiseach correctly to say that he would not give us the names of the members of the Economic Management Council, apart from those who are members of the Cabinet?
One does not name the officials on Cabinet sub-committees. The politicians on it are myself and the Tánaiste and the Ministers for Finance, Deputies Noonan and Howlin.
That is absurd. How are Irish citizens to know the quality of the membership and of the advice and decisions made by such a council if they do not know their identities? It is not as if this is a matter of significant national security. However, economic management is a massive issue for our people who are suffering the consequences of the current crisis of neoliberal capitalism. I put it to the Taoiseach that it is absurd not to identify the members and that he should change his policy in that regard.
The decisions taken at the Economic Management Council and by the Cabinet have all to be relayed to the public and explanations given as to why they were taken. This council, operating as a Cabinet committee, deals with the issues I mentioned, economic planning and budgetary management, banking strategy, the integration of the work of Departments and deals with the issues that arise regularly, such as the EU, the ECB and the IMF troika. Officials with different specialties may be called before the council. The politicians on the council are there to make recommendations and bring decisions to Cabinet for final endorsement and the Deputy has every right to ask about those.
Appointments to State Boards
Micheál Martin
Question:9 Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach in the context of his stated legal review of appointments by Ministers in the period between general elections and the meeting of the Dáil, if it will include a consideration of the large number of such appointments made by him and other Ministers in 1997. [6656/11]
I asked the Attorney General for her advice regarding the appointments to State boards by Ministers of the former Government in the period between the recent election campaign and the formation of the new Government, the appropriateness of these appointments during that period and whether there may be an opportunity to address this further. During this period of time, the previous Government appointed 110 people to State boards. Legal advice from the Attorney General states that it is not possible to remove these appointees.
The Government intends to improve significantly the process by which vacancies on the boards of State agencies and companies are filled.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the scale of appointments between the general election and 9 March was only a fraction of what occurred in 1997? At that time, some Ministers, including Deputy Noonan, made appointments to positions which were not vacant and the Taoiseach himself appointed a trustee of Fine Gael to a State board on his way out of office. Therefore, the Taoiseach must agree that this is another case of the new Government trying to climb on a moral high horse, despite its members having personally engaged in practices they now condemn.
With regard to the alleged new regime due to come on stream, in terms of interviewing applicants etc., I understand that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coveney, appointed a Mr. Meaney to the chair of Bord na gCon yesterday. Will the Taoiseach clarify whether that person was subject to an interview by any committee?
The Deputy is around here a long time and knows as well as I do that in the past Governments did this all the time. I raised this matter with my predecessor here, the former Taoiseach, Brian Cowen and suggested to him there should be no appointments made between the dissolution of the Dáil and the formation of the new Government. That was advance advice, but the Ministers of his Government did not heed that advice and went ahead and made 110 appointments.
Having taken the advice of the Attorney General, I will not go down the road of technical legislation or anything like that — we are stuck with it. That is why I have introduced changes that will bring about transparency and accountability to this area.
The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food made a recommendation to Cabinet yesterday for the appointment of the chairman of Bord na gCon because there are some issues there that need to be attended to as a matter of urgency. That chairman will have to go before the appropriate agriculture committee to give his views on how the board should be run, his vision for it, the competencies he brings to the position and how he views the future for the board. As in all other cases, that will be available as a public discourse between the committee dealing with agriculture and the appointee to Bord na gCon.
Will the Taoiseach confirm if the person has taken up the position — if he has been appointed by the Government?
The person has been nominated and appointed by the Government. He will have to go before the committee and, I assume, on the basis of what I said earlier, all such persons will have the necessary credentials and competencies and will present those credentials in a fitting manner at the Oireachtas committees. That will bring about an openness and transparency and provide an opportunity for people who want to serve to present their credentials in a proper manner. As I said earlier, I believe to the Deputy, if somebody in that position were to completely flop, as it were, the Government would have to take that into account.
I support the idea of people going before committees for interview and I promoted that as part of our manifesto. However, it seems that what was done yesterday by the Government in regard to Bord na gCon is almost in breach of the new regime it announced yesterday. In essence, a person has been appointed before that person has been interviewed by any committee. That is the point I want to make in this respect.
The Taoiseach would have had already available to him significant legal advice about the raft of appointments made by the Minister, Deputy Noonan, to non-existent health board vacancies towards the end of 1997. With the severance payments and ministerial pensions Ministers of the current Government took when they were previously Ministers and now having regard to this case, it is a case of there being double standards in many respects.
I welcome the new regime. However, it is important that it is brought into play as quickly as possible. I note that the Minister, Deputy Hogan, was furiously prompting the Taoiseach as I asked my question.
I do not like hypocrisy. I do not like the hypocrite to whom I am listening.
The Minister was anxious to make an appointment to Bord na gCon a few weeks ago but we did not allow that to happen because we wanted the process to be in place. There are some urgent matters that need to be attended to in respect of Bord na gCon.
Deputy Martin should check those.
The person appointed will have to go before the Dáil committee once it is set up, which should be in the very near future.
Judging by the tenor of the friendly, loving conversation between the Taoiseach and Deputy Martin about appointments to the State boards, in which both of their parties have indulged, I do not believe they understand the huge cynicism among ordinary people about this blatant jobbery.
What about the Deputy's replacement to the European Parliament?
The replacement to the European Parliament——
How did the Deputy manage that?
——is provided for according to law. The Minister knows that well.
This is the law as well.
His party used the legal procedure, where five Deputies are announced before the election and their names published in Iris Oifigiúil and in polling stations.
What about jobs for the Deputy's boys?
The law which the Government made was adhered to in this respect to the letter.
The Deputy did not want to change it.
That is the democratic process, limited and all as has been provided for by the Government.
We are talking about disgraceful jobbery where 110 people were stuffed by Fianna Fáil on to State boards, just as Fine Gael did previously, and their only qualification, for the most part, is that they were hacks of the political parties concerned. When will we have an end to this kind of cynicism?
Very little time remains and three Deputies are offering. I ask that they put their questions together; I call Deputy Boyd Barrett to be followed by Deputies Adams and Cowen
I am trying to avail of the wisdom and experience of the people who have been here much longer than I have been on the issue of——
The Deputy is learning well.
——the relationship between the Taoiseach's Department and State boards, semi-States and so on. I submitted a question on the accountability for semi-States and State boards, which was passed to the Minister for Finance by which I was little surprised. Is it not to the Taoiseach the people on State boards and semi-State boards should be responsible and should we not be allowed ask the Taoiseach questions about that in order that there is accountability in that respect to the Dáil?
The process by which these appointments are made must become more transparent. I welcome anything that brings that about. It is very regrettable that those who were appointed by the previous Government in its last days in office cannot be removed. I welcome the fact that proposed appointees will have to appear before committees but that cannot be just a rubber-stamp process. What happened previously was political patronage, plain and simple. In regard to the committee dealing with the appointment of the chair of Bord na gCon, and it is arguable that the dogs in the street are talking about that one, is that a nomination——
No, it is an appointment.
——or an appointment? What role then does that committee have? Can it say no to that? I understand there is a very good system in place in the United States, although I am not an expert on this, by which people being appointed have to go before quite powerful committees which can stop them from being appointed.
My comment is in the same vein. While I welcome the appointment of Mr. Meaney and I am sure he is most suited and capable to do the job at hand, it was an appointment that was overdue in the sense that the previous Government did not pursue an appointment to the chair of that board, as the Taoiseach well knows. The Government has made this appointment. Yesterday we were enamoured to hear the process that was to be engaged by the Government in regard to appointments such as this one. Like Deputy Adams, while I believe the appointee is quite suitable and capable and I am sure he will do a good job in the difficult role the board has in providing a service in that industry, if the committee is not of the same view as myself or the Taoiseach about Mr. Meaney's appointment, what teeth has it and what sort of a hoodwinking exercise is it to be in the future, if in its first day it is proved to be so?
Deputy Higgins raised the business of appointments, cronyism and all the rest of it. I have made it clear to Ministers that we have to take into account gender balance, competency and the credibility of people who offer themselves for appointment as chairs or to the membership of State boards. The second last Taoiseach, the former Deputy Bertie Ahern, admitted to me here that a significant number of appointments were made on the basis of friendship as distinct from merit. There is a commitment to a reduction in the number of quangos in place and obviously that will result in a reduction in the number of such appointments.
Deputy Cowen raised the question of what teeth the committee might have. The process here will not be the same as that in the United States where an investigation and all kinds of analysis is conducted of people who present themselves. The Government will make an appointment to the chair of a State board and that person will be required to go before the committee. The process will not be an interrogation but an opportunity for that person to present his or her case, vision, view for the agency or board involved. If the person makes a hames of that, obviously the Government will have to take that into account. Following the person's appearance before the relevant Dáil committee, be it agriculture, education, foreign affairs or whatever, the Government will sign off final approval on the appointment.
Therefore, it is the Government that makes the appointment in the end.
It is not a case of the committee on agriculture having the final say in respect of any such appointment.
It is the Government that will have it.
This is for the sake of optics.
It is the Government that makes the appointment but there is an opportunity to have a far——
The Government has a majority on all of them.
——greater degree of openness and transparency than existed previously.
However, the Government has a majority on all of them.
The Deputy's party made 110 appointments.
It is an optical illusion.
We will now have statements on the European Council.
Deputy Boyd Barrett's question was transferred to the Department of Finance. I do not know what question he asked. It was probably related to the fact that the board in question was under the aegis of that Department.
I asked a general question about semi-State companies and State boards.
The matter would be referred to the line Minister in the first instance, but it is the Government which makes the appointments.