Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions debate -
Wednesday, 7 Nov 2012

Tuarascáil an Choimisinéara Teanga maidir le Comórtais Inmheánacha sa Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí: Mionphlé

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Táimid ag déanamh déileáil sa chuid seo den chlár le tuarascáil an Choimisinéara Teanga maidir le bronnadh marcanna breise - bonus points - as líofacht sa Ghaeilge i gcomórtais inmheánacha sa Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí.

Before I commence I wish to advise that, by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, those who will make presentations are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against a person, persons or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

I will read a background to the subject of this discussion to give the context for it. An Coimisinéir Teanga undertook two investigations arising from complaints made to his office in regard to the procedures adopted by the Department of Social Protection to award bonus marks for proficiency in Irish and in English in internal promotions competitions. An coimisinéir made certain recommendations to the Department arising from these investigations. The Department subsequently confirmed to an coimisinéir that it did not intend to implement the recommendations made in either of the two investigations. An coimisinéir accordingly made a report of the matter to the Houses of the Oireachtas pursuant to section 26(5) of the Official Languages Act 2003.

The committee met An Coimisinéir Teanga on 2 May 2012 and considered the report further on 18 July 2012. Arising from that meeting, correspondence issued to the Department of Social Protection and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. In its reply the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform suggested that the committee might also wish to consider inviting representatives of the Commission for Public Service Appointments, the body that regulates public service recruitment, and the Public Appointments Service, the main recruitment body for the Civil Service, on the basis that both bodies would be in a position to provide valuable input into the matters under consideration. Representatives of each of the four bodies are available to make a statement to the committee. The text of statements supplied by each body are included in this document and a paragraph number is provided for ease of reference.

In the report to the Houses of the Oireachtas, An Coimisinéir Teanga identified in the interpretation of the Department of Finance circulars, and especially at what point during a competition for promotion should credit be given for proficiency in Irish as a central issue. That is the report I mentioned earlier.

The findings of the An Coimisinéir Teanga were as follows: a statutory requirement for Government Departments, including the Department of Social Protection, to award bonus marks for language competency in internal competitions, as set out in circulars 43/75 and circular 30/90; it would be ultra vires for the Department of Social Projection to amend, on its own initiative, by means of an office notice the provision of circulars which secure rights for individuals when those circulars have been issued by a specific Minister by virtue of and pursuant to powers confirmed by section 17 of the Civil Service Regulation Act; the relevant circulars do not permit the restriction of bonus marks only to those who secure a place on the final panel; and that subsection 1(d) of circular 43/75 clearly directs that " A knowledge of Irish will, however, be one of the factors which will be assessed in selecting staff for promotion". Where bonus marks are not awarded to a suitably qualified person, that person's rights are contravened.

The recommendations of An Coimisinéir Teanga were that the Department revise the results of these two promotional competitions to ensure that bonus marks, proficiency in both Irish and English were properly awarded to the complainants and also that the complainants should receive any benefit which might arise from the revised marking. An coimisinéir also recommended that the Department ensure that the provisions of the relevant circulars were fully employed in future in all its promotion competitions and that the Department inform the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, the Public Appointment Service and the Public Service Appointments Commission of the findings and recommendations of the investigations.

I note I am being summoned as a vote has been called in the Dáil. There are a number of witnesses before us. I propose to suspend proceedings until after the vote. I apologise to the witnesses and ask for their indulgence. We will begin with the witnesses' statements when we reconvene.

Sitting suspended at 5.30 p.m. and resumed at 5.45 p.m.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Tá gach duine anseo so cuirfimid tús arís leis an gcruinniú. Ar dtús, ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh na finnéithe atá os ár gcomhair inniu. Tá ceithre eagras anseo linn - an Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí, an Coimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí, an tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí agus an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe. Na finnéithe atá againn ón Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí ná Dr. Orlaigh Quinn, Ms Celine Moore agus Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh. Ón gCoimisiúm um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí, tá Mr. Andrew Patterson, agus ón tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí, tá Mr. Pádraig Love. Ón Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe, tá Ms Patricia Coleman agus Ms Gráinne McGuckin agus Mr. Jake Byrne.

Táimse tar éis leagan amach cén fáth go bhfuilimid anseo chun déileáil leis seo. Iarraim ar an gcéad ghrúpa ón Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí tús a chur lena chur i láthair.

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

Gabhaim buíochas don choiste as ucht cuireadh a thabhairt don Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí aitheasc a thabhairt don choiste. Cuireann an Roinn réimse leathan seirbhísí ioncaim agus fostaíochta agus seirbhísí eile ar fáil trí líonra 130 oifig atá aici féin agus trí 900 láthair eile ar fud an Stáit. Cuireann na scéimeanna agus seirbhísí sin sochair ar fáil do níos mó ná 2 milliún duine. Tá an Roinn lán-dáiríre faoi sheirbhís Ghaeilge a chur ar fáil dá gcustaiméirí agus faoi bhreis forbartha agus oiliúna a chur ar an bhfoireann chun feabhas a chur ar an tseirbhís Ghaeilge sin. Tá tacaíochtaí éagsúla ar fáil chun na scileanna agus an féinmhuinín riachtanach a thabhairt don fhoireann gur féidir léi seirbhís Ghaeilge ar ard-chaighdeán a chur ar fáil dá gcustaiméirí ar an bhfón, i litreacha agus duine le duine. Tá 7,000 nach mór ag obair sa Roinn agus bhí páirt mhór riamh ag an Roinn i gcomórtais ardú céime a reáchtáil ar gach grád. Le blianta beaga anuas, agus go háirithe ó thaobh na líon foirne a bhí i gceist, ba mhór an chabhair a fuair an Roinn ón gCoimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí. I gcás gach comórtas, chloígh an Roinn i gcónaí do na himlitreacha aonaithe ar fad a eisíodh do Ranna Rialtais ar fud na Státseirbhíse.

I dtaca leis an gceist shonrach faoi mharcanna bónais a bhronnadh i gcomórtais inmheánacha, ba é nós na Roinne riamh marcanna bónais a bhronnadh de réir imlitir 43/75 na Roinne Airgeadais, arna leasú ag imlitir 30/90, orthu siúd a ghnóthaigh áit ar phainéil ó agallamh deireadh an chomórtais. Tá an Roinn sásta go mbronnann sí marcanna bónais ar an tslí chéanna le gach Roinn Rialtais eile agus de réir chód cleachtais an Choimisiúin um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí. Anuas air sin, rinne an Coimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí iniúchadh roimhe seo ar phróiseas iomaíocha na Roinne lena n-áirítear ceann de na comórtais is ábhar de thuarascáil an Choimisinéara. Áiríodh ar an iniúchadh an próiseas roghnúcháin agus measúnaithe, lena n-áirítear creidiúint a bhronnadh as inniúlacht teanga. Fuarthas go raibh gach rud mar ba chóir.

Scrúdaigh an Roinn an tuarascáil a eisíodh tar éis imscrúdaithe an Choimisinéara Teanga agus de réir mholadh uimh. 5, cuireadh an cheist ar aghaidh go dtí an Roinn Airgeadais, atá anois ina Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe. Beidh an Roinn ag tabhairt aithisc don choiste inniu chomh maith. Mhol an Roinn an uair sin don Choimisinéir teagmháil a dhéanamh leis an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe os í an Roinn atá freagrach as téarmaí agus coinníollacha seirbhíse a shocrú do státseirbhísigh. Chuir an Roinn an staid sin in iúl don Choimisinéir ar ócáidí éagsúla. Níl ar chumas na Roinne na moltaí a chur i ngníomh toisc go gciallódh sin leasú aontaobhach a dhéanamh ar bheartas lár-aontaithe. Bheadh tionchar forleathan aige sin i Ranna seachas sa Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí.

Tacaíonn an Roinn go hiomlán le marcanna bónais a bheith á mbronnadh as iniúlacht sa Ghaeilge ag agallamh. Tá sí sásta go gcomhlíonann sí go hiomlán cód cleachtais an Choimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí, gnás agus cleachtas sa Státseirbhís agus imlitreacha na Roinne Airgeadais. Sna cúig bliana dheireanacha, eagraíodh 19 de chomórtais inmheánacha ardú chéime sa Roinn. Ghlac 4,500 baill foirne páirt sna comórtais sin agus bhí deis acu ar fad triall inniúlachta sa Ghaeilge a dhéanamh. Tacaíonn an Roinn go díograiseach le hinniúlacht sa Ghaeilge a chur chun cinn sa Roinn agus leis an bpróiseas chun marcanna bónais a bhronnadh i gcomórtais ardú chéime.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Gabhaim buíochas as an méid atá ráite ag an bhfinné. Iarraim ar na comhaltaí ceisteanna a chur sula dtosóidh an chéad ghrúpa eile.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Cuirim fáilte roimh na finnéithe uilig. Táim thar a bheith buíoch díofa as a bheith anseo agus deis a thabhairt an t-ábhar fíor-thábhachtach seo a phlé. Ó thaobh comhthéacs a thabhairt don cheist ar fad, agus tá seo tábhachtach ach níor clúdaíodh é sin i ndáiríre, tháinig an t-athrú polasaí seo i bhfeidhm 35 de bhliana ó shin nuair a bhí an tAire Richie Ryan ann. D'athraigh sé an Ghaeilge éigeantach sa Státseirbhís mar chóras. Ag an am dúirt sé go raibh sé ag cur na bpríomhathruithe i bhfeidhm le go mbeadh an Ghaeilge agus an Béarla ar chomhchéim feasta i gcomórtais iontrála na Státseirbhíse, go mbeadh ar chumas iarrthóirí an Ghaeilge, nó an Béarla, nó an dá theanga sin a thairiscint i gcomórtais agus go dtabharfaí creidiúint d'iarrthóirí a bheadh oilte sa dá theanga. Dúirt sé freisin go mbeadh an Rialtas lán-mhuiníneach go musclódh na hathruithe seo a chuirfeadh an spreagadh in áit éigeantais, dea-mhéin bhreise don Ghaeilge agus go gcuideoidís le leathnú na teanga laistigh agus lasmuigh den Státseirbhís trí atmaisféar níos fabhraí a chothú di.

Dúirt sé freisin go raibh siad curtha i bhfeidhm le meas agus cothú na teanga a chur in áit an éigeantais. Dúirt sé nuair a bheidís curtha i bhfeidhm, go mbeadh an Ghaeilge agus an Béarla ar aon dul anois agus tig le duine den chéad uair post sa Státseirbhís a bhaint amach gan Bhéarla. Cheap sé go gcuirfeadh sé feabhas ar staid na Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís agus lasmuigh di. B’fhéidir an rud is tábhachtaí agus is suntasaí a dúirt sé ag an am ná faoin gcóras nua beidh marcanna breise le fáil ag iarrthóirí ar phoist sa Státseirbhís le Gaeilge agus le Béarla. Bhí súil aige go mbeadh cumas na Gaeilge ag formhór na ndaoine a cheapfaí amach ansin. Chabhródh Gaeleagras na Státseirbhíse le hoifigigh chun feabhas a chur ar a gcuid Gaeilge. Chuirfí eolas ar an Ghaeilge san áireamh freisin le haghaidh ardú-céime. Ní bheadh aon easpa Gaeilge mar sin sa Státseirbhís agus bheadh fonn níos láidre chun feidhm a bhaint aisti toisc deireadh an éigeantais. Bhí sé cinnte go mbeadh feabhas mór ar an scéal de bharr a raibh déanta ag an Rialtas. Sin a dúirt Richie Ryan ag an am in 1974 nuair a chuir sé deireadh leis an Ghaeilge éigeantach.

Faraor, an taithí atá ag pobal na Gaeilge agus na Gaeltachta go háirithe nár tháinig feabhas, nár tháinig ardú ar líon na ndaoine le Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís; cuirfidh mé ceist faoi sin níos deireanaí.

Ba mhaith cur i gcomhthéacs freisin ról agus cumhachtaí an Choimisinéara Teanga féin. Tá an Coimisinéir ceaptha ag Uachtarán na hÉireann ar chomhairle an Rialtas tar éis do Thithe an Oireachtais rún a rith ag moladh an cheapacháin. Tá feidhmeanna agus cumhachtaí an Choimisinéara Teanga leagtha amach in Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla. Tá neamhspleáchas iomlán aige ina ról mar Choimisinéir Teanga. Téann sin go croí an scéil. Tá daoine áirithe agus comhghleacaithe liom féin a bhíonn ag tabhairt amach dom faoi cheist na Gaeilge agus cén fáth go mbím i gcónaí ag bualadh an druma maidir le ceist na Gaeilge ach tá buncheist anseo a chaithfimid a phlé inniu a bhaineann leis an aitheantas atá ag an nGaeilge ó thaobh na Státseirbhíse de.

Tá an Coimisinéir Teanga ag feidhmiú mar Ombudsman agus glacaimid leis go bhfuil an Ombudsman neamhspleách agus gur réiteoir é i gcásanna a cheapann daoine go bhfuil faillí déanta ó thaobh seirbhísí Stáit. Tá sé neamhspleách ar an Rialtas chomh maith. Táim ag glacadh leis go bhfuil údarás neamhspleách ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga ach an chead cheist atá agam ar an Dochtúir Quinn agus a cuid comhghleacaithe ón Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí ná an nglacann siad leis go bhfuil údarás neamhspleách ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga agus go bhfuil an focal deireadh aige i gcás imscrúdú ar nós mar atá ag na hOmbudsmana eile. Má dhéanann sé imscrúdú, tá an focal deireanach aige. Mura nglacann siad leis sin, cé a thugann an t-údarás sin dóibh gan ghlacadh? Cén áit sa reachtaíocht a bhfuil sé ráite nach bhfuil an t-údarás sin aige? De reír an léimh atá agam ar an gCoimisinéir in Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla, tá an chumhacht sin aige. An nglactar leis, mura bhfuil eagras nó Roinn Stáit sásta leis an mbreith a dhéanann an Coimisinéir Teanga, mar a bhí sa chás seo, gurb é an córas achomhairc atá ag an Roinn ná cás Ard-Chúirte a thógáil?

Tuigim go bhfuil go leor fianaise os ár gcomhair agus go bhfuil go leor rudaí comónta san fhianaise éagsúil a tugadh. Glacaim leis gur cuireadh an fhianaise sin beagnach ar fad os comhair an Choimisinéara Teanga agus d’iarr muid air nuair a bhí sé anseo an raibh sin déanta. Tuigim go raibh an chuid is mó den fhianaise, an méid atá á rá sna haighneachtaí éagsúla, os a chomhair agus go ndearna sé breith ar an bhfianaise sin. De réir na reachtaíochta, tá an focal deireanach aige sa bhreith a dhéanann sé, ach mura nglacann Roinn Stáit leis, an rogha atá aici ná cás Ard-Chúirte a ghlacadh leis sin a throid. Ar cuireadh sin in iúl don Roinn? Ar chuir an Coimisinéir Teanga in iúl go raibh an rogha sin ag an Roinn agus go bhféadfadh sí dúshlán a thabhairt tríd an Ard-Chúirt agus ar phlé an Roinn an rogha sin í féin nó leis an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe nó le haon Roinn eile?

Mura thóg an Roinn rogha cás Ard-Chúirte a ghlacadh, an nglacann an Roinn leis go seasann breith an Choimisinéara Teanga go bhfuil sin críochnúil anois gurb é sin an breith dheireanach sa chás seo?

Ceist bhunúsach eile, más féidir freagra réasúnta díreach a fháil uirthi. An gceapann an Roinn go ndearna an Coimisinéir Teanga botún sa chás seo? Má cheapann, cén fianaise ar a bhfuil sin bunaithe?

Rialaigh an Coimisinéir ó thaobh na ndaoine a rinne an gearán an chéad lá riamh. Uaireanta déantar dearmad ar na daoine a thóg an cás an chéad lá riamh go dtí an Coimisinéir. Glacaim leis go bhfuil sé roinnt mhaith de bhlianta ar an bhfód. Rialaigh an Coimisinéir go bhfaigheadh na daoine sin a rinne gearán a gcearta. An bhfuil aon cheo déanta ag an Roinn idir an dá linn ó rinne an Coimisinéir Teanga a bhreith lena gcearta a shlánú do na daoine sin a bhí i gceist? An bhfuil sé i gceist ag an Roinn sin a dhéanamh? Mura dtabharfadh an Roinn a gcearta dóibh, an bhfuil contúirt ann go dtabharfaí a ndúshlán sna cúirteanna mar thoradh air sin? Mura bhfaigheann na daoine a thóg an cás an chéad lá riamh cothrom na Féinne, de réir mar a rialaigh an Coimisinéir, an bhfuil sé oscailte dóibh cás cúirte a thógáil in aghaidh na Roinne agus an Stáit? An bhfuil teagmháil déanta ag na daoine seo leis an Roinn? Ar chuala an Roinn uathu ar aon bhealach? An bhféadfadh daoine eile a bheith sa chás chéanna ós rud é go bhfuil an Roinn ag rá – agus cuireann seo scanradh orm – go bhfuil sí sásta go mbronnann sí marcanna bónais ar an tslí chéanna le gach Roinn Rialtais eile agus de réir chód chleachtais an Choimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí?

Má tá an Coimisinéir Teanga ceart, tá an cleachtas seo i bhfeidhm le 37 bliain agus tá an cleachtas sin mícheart. An gciallaíonn sin go bhfuil an doras oscailte do dhaoine eile a bheadh míshásta leis an mbealach a caitheadh leo? D’fhéadfadh daoine eile a bheith sa chás chéanna ós rud é go bhfuil an cleachtadh seo i bhfeidhm le 37 bliain agus de réir an Choimisinéara, tá an córas lochtach.

Tá go leor ceisteanna sin atá domhain go maith ach téann seo ar ais chuig an mbunphrionsabal, go bhfuil an Coimisinéir Teanga ceaptha le bheith neamhspleách agus go bhfuil údarás neamhspleách aige, amhail is atá an gnáth-Ombudsman, Ombudsman na leanaí srl. Má tá na Ranna agus na heagrais Stáit ag rá go bhfuil siad ag glacadh le treoir uathu féin nó ó áit éigin eile cosúil leis an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe, tá sin ag baint de chumhacht agus d’údarás an Choimisinéara Teanga agus tá impleachtaí aige sin do na hOmbudsman eile chomh maith céanna.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

An bhfuil ceist ag aon chomhalta eile? Are there any other questions to the witnesses? Níl.

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

Tá sé deacair don Roinn scéim mar sin a athrú. Scéim í atá ann ar feadh 37 bliain agus táimid sásta go bhfuil na comórtais i gceart agus sásta gur líonamar gach rialachán. B’fhéidir go mbeadh daoine eile anseo le tuairimí eile ach mar a dúirt mé, níl ar chumas na Roinne na moltaí sin a chur i ngníomh toisc go gciallódh sin leasú aontaobhach a dhéanamh ar bheartas lár-aontaithe agus an tionchar a bheadh ann do gach Roinn Stáit. Mar gheall air sin, ní rabhamar in ann na rudaí sin a thógáil agus dhíríomar na ceisteanna chuig an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tá sin ráite sa ráiteas ach ní thugann sin freagra do chuid mhaith de na ceisteanna an-bhunúsacha a chuir mé. Cé gur dúradh nach féidir leis an Roinn é a chur i bhfeidhm, ní shin le rá nach bhfuil an Coimisinéir Teanga ceart. An nglacann an Roinn le húdarás an Choimisinéara go bhfuil sé de chumhacht aige rialú a dhéanamh agus go bhfuil gá go nglacfadh Ranna Stáit leis an rialú sin nó, mura nglacann, go gcaithfear cás Ard-Chúirte a thógáil leis sin a throid?

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

Tá an ciorclán sin i bhfeidhm ón Aire Airgeadais agus sin an scéim atá ann. Tá tuairimí ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga ach tá sé deacair dom a rá an bhfuil sé ceart nó mícheart.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Ó thaobh an phróisis de, de réir mar a thuigim, is cuma an dtaitneodh sé linn nó nach dtaitneodh, mura mbeadh an Roinn sásta leis an mbreith, chaithfeadh sí an dúshlán a thabhairt taobh istigh de cheithre seachtaine san Ard-Chúirt. An raibh caint faoi sin nó an raibh an Roinn ar an eolas faoi sin? Ar thóg an Roinn cás den chineál sin mar sin an próiseas dlíthiúil atá againn?

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

Bhíomar ag smaoineamh air sin ach, arís, toisc go bhfuil sí ina scéim atá ann ar fud na Státseirbhíse, ní orainne an dualgas an cás a thógáil. Tá sé deacair dúinne nuair atá an scéim ann mar scéim lárnach throughout the Civil Service. Tá sé deacair í a athrú.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

An bhfuair an Roinn comhairle faoi sin ón Roinn Airgeadais nó an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe? Glacaim leis gurb é dlí na tíre dlí na tíre. Ní fheicim go bhfuil seo roghnach; tá sé éigeantach ó thaobh an phróisis de. Níl mé ag iarraidh piocadh ar an Roinn trí chéile mar sin an fáth go bhfuil an cheist seo iontach tábhachtach - baineann sí le gach Roinn Rialtais ó thaobh an rud seo a chur i bhfeidhm. Níor leanadh an próiseas mar ba cheart. Bhí dualgas ar an Roinn achomharc a dhéanamh in aghaidh an ruda seo mura raibh daoine sásta faoi agus mura raibh, seasann an cinneadh a glacadh agus an rialú a rinne an Coimisinéir Teanga. Dá bhrí sin, ba chóir go mbeadh na daoine ar ndearnadh éagóir orthu in ann a gceart a fháil. Céard atá déanta maidir leis na daoine sin? An bhfuil teagmháil ann idir an Roinn agus na daoine sin nó an bhfuil aon cheist maidir le cúrsaí dlí leis na daoine sin?

Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh

Ní aontóinn leis an Seanadóir go bhfuil orainn glacadh leis an Ombudsman sa chás seo nó in aon chás eile; tá sé roghnach dúinn dul os comhair na cúirte nó gan dul os a comhair. Shíleamar nach raibh sé de rogha againn an cás a thabhairt sa Roinn féin toisc gur scéim lárnach í seo. Chuireamar eolas ar an dréacht a fuaireamar ón gCoimisinéir go dtí an Roinn. Cloisfidh an coiste a bhfuil le rá ag an Roinn i gceann cúpla nóiméad.

Ó thaobh na ceisteanna eile a bhí ag an Seanadóir, tá beirt i dteagmháil linn faoin gcás seo ach ní fhéadaimis labhairt faoi na cásanna sin. Níl aon dabht ach go bhfuil daoine eile sa chás chéanna. Tá an scéim seo ann le 37 bliain anuas agus tá sí á reáchtáil againn ar an tslí chéanna leis na blianta. Sin an scéal sna Ranna eile chomh maith. Dá mbeadh an ceart ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga, bheadh an-obair le déanamh chun an méid sin a chur bun os cionn.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Tabharfaidh mé ceist amháin eile don Seanadóir mar tá trí ghrúpa eile le teacht isteach fós.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tá an cheist seo fíor-bhunúsach, baineann sí leis na heagrais ar fad.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Níl mé ag iarraidh go mbeadh daoine ag dul anonn agus anall ag déileáil leis an bhfreagra céanna.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tá mé ar lorg soiléiriú maidir leis an gceist sin. Tá sé luaite ag an Dochtúir Quinn san aitheasc a thug sí gur chuir an Roinn 4,500 faoi agallamh le cúig bliana anuas. Dá mhéadófaí sin thar 37 bliain, táimid ag caint faoi na mílte daoine sa Roinn. Má bhí an cleachtadh seo i bhfeidhm sna Ranna ar fad, agus má tá an Coimisinéir ceart go raibh sé mícheart ó thaobh an dlí de, táimid ag caint faoi na mílte daoine go bhféadfadh éagóir a bheith déanta orthu ó thaobh ceapacháin sa Státseirbhís. Sin bunús an scéil. B’fhéidir nach dtaitneodh sé linn é sin a admháil ach ceist an-tromchúiseach atá inti agus ní mór í a leigheas agus cothrom na Féinne a thabhairt do dhaoine a bhfuil a gcearta dlite acu, go háirithe na daoine seo ag a bhfuil na cásanna tógtha acu nó atá i dteagmháil leis an Roinn má tá cás bona fide acu.

An bunphrionsabal a bhí ann anseo, agus an rud a dúirt Richie Ryan, ná go rabhamar in ainm daoine agus seirbhísí trí Ghaeilge a bheith ar fáil sa Státseirbhís. Níor tharla sin agus níl sé ann. Cuid mhaith den locht a bheadh air sin ná nár ceapadh daoine le Gaeilge nó nár tugadh an buntáiste sin dóibh sa phróiseas earcaíochta. Tá ceist uafásach tromchúiseach anseo, baineadh stang asam ag an méid atá mé ag cloisteáil, go bhféadfadh na mílte daoine sa Státseirbhís, a rinne cúrsaí le Gaeleagras agus d’fhoghlaim Gaeilge mar go raibh siad den tuairim go bhfaighidís buntáiste ó thaobh ceapacháin de, a bheith amuigh ansin.

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

Ar dtús báire, caithfidh an duine a bheith in ann an jab a dhéanamh. Tar éis sin, feicimid an Ghaeilge atá aige ach caithfidh an duine a bheith ábalta an jab a dhéanamh.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Dúirt an Coimisinéir a mhalairt ar fad. Bhí mé ag plé le cúrsaí fostaíochta tamaillín mé féin. Nuair atá post le fógairt, cuirtear sonrú-poist le chéile agus bíonn sé an-soiléir má tá Gaeilge éigeantach nó riachtanach don phost sin má tá scileanna ríomhaireachta nó scileanna eile de dhíth, caithfidh sin bheith sa sonrú-poist chomh maith agus ní maith don Roinn sin a thógáil san áireamh sa phróiseas ar fad. Ní ag an nóiméad deireanach a chuirtear an cheist an bhfuil Gaeilge ag an duine sin nó nach bhfuil agus sin an tráth a thugtar an buntáiste, tá sin ceaptha a bheith ann ó thús an phróisis. Is é an pointe atá á dhéanamh ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga ná gur coinníodh daoine as an bpróiseas ag an tús mar gheall nár tógadh san áireamh go raibh an scil bhreise seo acu, an Ghaeilge - mar a bhí in ainm agus a bheith i gceist.

Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh

Ní aontóinn leis sin. Níl éinne sa Státseirbhís inniu a bhfuil Gaeilge aige nach bhfuair aitheantas ar an nGaeilge sin. Fuair gach éinne a raibh an caighdeán sroichte aige ó thaobh an jab a dhéanamh agus a raibh Gaeilge aige chomh maith, an bónas le haghaidh na Gaeilge. Níl aon dabht faoi sin agus níl aon éagóir ansin in aon chor. Rud a bheadh ann ná go mbeadh jabanna ann a raibh Gaeilge ag teastáil iontu go bunúsach chun an jab sin a dhéanamh. Is rud difriúil ar fad é sin.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tuigim gur sin tuairim na Roinne ach ón méid a léigh mé i dtuarascáil an Choimisinéara, níor aontaigh sé leis an tuairim sin agus rialaigh sé ina coinne. Dá bhrí sin, glacann an Roinn lena rialú nó ní ghlacann sí leis. Mura nglacann sí leis agus mura aontaíonn sí leis, tá fadhb ann mar is é an Coimisinéir an t-údarás neamhspleách a dhéanann rialú ar na ceisteanna seo.

Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh

Níl an focal deireanach aige. Tugann sé breithiúnas, glacaimid leis sin, ach níl sé mar phost ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga an Státseirbhís a riaradh.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Caithfimid bogadh ar aghaidh. Níl mé ag iarraidh srian a chur air seo ach tá trí ghrúpa eile le teacht agus beidh na ceisteanna céanna dírithe orthu siúd. B’fhéidir go mbeidís in ann freagra níos fearr a thabhairt, nó b’fhéidir nach mbeidís; feicfimid.

An dara grúpa atá le teacht os ár gcomhair ná thar ceann an Choimisiúin um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí, Mr. Andrew Patterson.

Mr. Andrew Patterson

I thank the committee for the invitation today to set out the Commission for Public Service Appointments’ position on the provision of additional credit for proficiency in both official languages in appointment processes for the promotion of staff within the Civil Service.

By way of background, the CPSA was established under the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004. Under section 13 of the Act, the CPSA must draw up codes of practice that describe the principles of probity, merit, equity and fairness that must be followed in the recruitment and selection of persons to positions in the Civil Service, including promotion to positions in the Civil Service, and other bodies in the public service within its remit.

While the codes establish standards to which recruiters must adhere, they do not prescribe how recruiters must act to ensure compliance with those standards. Under the codes of practice, public bodies are required to have in place proper job descriptions which set out the duties and responsibilities for the vacancies they wish to fill and from which objective selection criteria can be established. The codes also set down personal specifications which stipulate the knowledge, experience and skills that are required for the position, and these must be relevant to the role they are filling.

Section 58 of the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004. provides that the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform's responsibilities include the use or knowledge of the Irish language within the Civil Service as it relates to recruitment and promotions. The code also states that the provision for the award of additional credit for both official languages is made in line with Government policy, the requirements of the job and any other statutory requirements. The CPSA has no operational role in the promotion of staff in the Civil Service. However, it monitors adherence to the standards set out in the codes by auditing appointment processes and by examining complaints. In auditing appointment processes and in its examination of complaints the CPSA considers whether the job descriptions and the personal specifications are reflected at all stages in the selection process, for example, candidate traction, determination of the selection process, the selection criteria, preliminary screening, selection of members of the shortlisting and interview boards, questions asked by the interview board, marking schemes, and rationale provided for decisions taken on candidates.

The CPSA acknowledges that public service bodies must have sufficient numbers of staff proficient in the Irish language to be able to meet their obligations under the Official Languages Act 2003 and that the recruitment and promotion processes can play a significant role in ensuring these staff complements are in place. It also notes that many appointment processes involves two or more stages. The CPSA is concerned that there is a risk that providing for additional credit for both official languages at all stages in the appointment process, including those processes used for promoting staff, means the outcome of the appointment process may be skewed by favouring those who are proficient in both official languages at the expense of those who have attained a higher rating in other predetermined job related selection criteria. Introducing a weighting selection criteria for promotion in a manner that is not tied to the candidate's ability to perform the duties of a more senior role may inadvertently and adversely affect the outcome of recruitment and promotion processes.

The CPSA recognises the role of An Coimisinéir Teanga in promoting and improving the use of the Irish language in the public service. It also wishes to state that its own statutory duties require it to work with public service bodies to ensure candidates are appointed on merit using selection criteria linked to the duties and responsibilities of the role.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

An bhfuil ceist ag éinne?

Deputy Peter Mathews

Tá cúpla ceist agam. I have a few questions. I thank Mr. Patterson for his presentation. May I draw his attention to the statement that under section 13 of the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004, the CPSA must draw up codes of practice that describe the principles of probity, merit, equity and fairness that must be followed in recruitment and selection of persons to positions, including promotions in those public service bodies within its remit. May I invite him to confirm that the relevant code of practice in this instance would be the code of practice for appointment to positions in the Civil Service and public service No. 0107? Is that correct?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

Yes.

Deputy Peter Mathews

Will he confirm also that the code of practice is the following and only the following in relation to Irish language proficiency: that terms and conditions, eligibility criteria and the use and knowledge of the Irish language are agreed with the appropriate Minister at the outset in accordance with the requirements of the job and-or any statutory requirements? Does Mr Patterson agree with that?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

Yes.

Deputy Peter Mathews

Provision in relation to the award of additional credit for proficiency in both the English and Irish languages is made in line with Government policy in accordance with the requirements of the job and any statutory requirements. Is that correct?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

That is correct.

Deputy Peter Mathews

The relevant Minister is responsible for all matters relating to recruitment, including eligibility criteria, terms and conditions and use or knowledge of the Irish language. Is that right?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

That is right; that is in the codes.

Deputy Peter Mathews

In the statement, Mr. Patterson explained "The code also states that the provision for the award of additional credit for both official languages is made in line with Government policy, the requirements of the job and-or any statutory requirements."

Mr. Andrew Patterson

I was trying to summarise what was included.

Deputy Peter Mathews

What is Mr. Patterson's understanding of Government policy in relation to the award of additional credit for proficiency in both the English and Irish languages? What is the basis of his understanding of the policy?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

Government policy as prescribed in legislation, for example, within the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004 and Civil Service Regulation Act 1956.

Deputy Peter Mathews

Okay. In practice how is provision in relation to the award of additional credit for proficiency in both the English and Irish languages settled for particular competitions? For example, who presents the general scheme for a competition to whom for approval? What role does the Commission for Public Service Appointments play in approving a competition and in practice how does it perform that role?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

We have no operational role in the management of promotion competitions. That is done Department by Department or centrally through the Public Appointments Service. We audit appointment processes to ensure compliance with the codes or we examine complaints from complainants who were dissatisfied with their treatment during the appointment process.

Deputy Peter Mathews

Is there an assumption that everything is going according to plan unless the CPSA hears to the contrary?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

We do proactive audits as well as examining complaints.

Deputy Peter Mathews

In his statement, Mr. Patterson explains that "In auditing appointment processes and its examination of complaints the CPSA considers whether the job descriptions and person specification are reflected in all stages of the selection process". Does this mean that he is concerned only with ensuring the processes applying to a particular competition have been complied with?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

That is the commission's principal function.

Deputy Peter Mathews

Is that compliance with processes?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

Yes, absolutely. The processes must be founded on circulars, or the foundation document for most processes is the predetermined job description and personal specification for the role.

Deputy Peter Mathews

If the process took place, everything is fine, but what about the quality of the process?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

We examine the quality of the process as well. It is not within the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act but another element of the code of practice is adherence to best practice. That is an additional principle within the CPSA's code of practice that we ensure is observed.

Deputy Peter Mathews

I understand from the website that the Commission for Public Service Appointments safeguards standards in the public appointments system through an audit and evaluation process that may include a specific appointments process or a specific aspect of the appointments process, as practised by a range of licenceholders and officerholders. Was either the appointment process that gave rise to An Coimisnéir Teanga's report to the Houses of the Oireachtas or the application of circulars 43/75 and 30/90 subjected to specific audit and evaluation? If so, can the committee have a copy of any report produced as a result?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

I understand one of the appointment processes to which the Deputy referred was examined by the CPSA. I have a copy of the committee's report and I am quite happy to provide it to the members of the committee. We have not done a specific audit on the application of the Irish language. That is commented upon. The CPSA did look at how marks were awarded for Irish and noted that proficiency in both official languages was taken into account at the final interview stage in the process.

Deputy Peter Mathews

In simple family dinner table conversation terms, I take it that the qualifications and the characteristics that are needed to do the job properly are sensible and that this is an added bonus. Irish is our national official language, but in other circumstances it could well have been French or German to assist those working in Europe.

Mr. Andrew Patterson

In most jobs that CPSA has evaluated either through complaint investigations or audits, we start off, as mentioned, with the job description as the foundation from which we carry out our audit or complaint examination.

We would question whether the job description accurately reflects the role being carried out and go sequentially through the various stages of the process. The issue of the Irish language was only considered in the context of the circular. Our interpretation of the circular and general practice is that the Irish language was taken into account at the final stages of the appointment when the order of merit is being formed. In the case of the audit of the Department of Social Protection we noted that the additional credit was only taken into account-----

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

I ask Mr. Patterson to pause as another vote has been called. I was hoping that-----

Deputy Peter Mathews

May I make one short comment? I have finished my questioning. For me the Oireachtas has been a wonderful appetiser to learn and to love the language more, I mean that seriously, and being able to a say a few words of introduction, valediction or encouragement in our national language. It makes it a pleasure.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

I was hoping to get through this meeting without having to call a suspension.

Sitting suspended at 6.30 p.m. and resumed at 6.35 p.m.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Bhí an t-Uasal Andrew Patterson ag tabhairt freagra don Teachta Peter Mathews. Mr. Patterson, had you finished?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

I have, yes.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Bhí an Seanadóir Ó Clochartaigh ag iarraidh roinnt ceisteanna a chur.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Tá mé sásta gur dhearbhaigh an t-Uasal Patterson, ó thaobh próisis de, go gcuirtear na cúinsí ar fad san áireamh agus go leagtar amach job spec ar thús an phróisis ar fad, ó thaobh na Ranna Rialtais ar fad. Glactar leis, má tá Gaeilge i gceist, go bhfuil sé leagtha amach sa job spec go bhfuil Gaeilge ag teastáil, ar bhonn éigeanntach nó roghnach, don phost.

Mr. Andrew Patterson

Absolutely.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Dá bhrí sin, nach raibh an ceart ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga, má bhí Gaeilge ag teastáil don phost, gur chóir sin a chur san áireamh sa phróiseas roghnúcháin ag an tús, má tá sé leagtha amach go bhfuil Gaeilge ag teastáil don phost?

Déanann an tUasal Patterson pointe eile, pointe a thógfainn suas leis. Deir sé má cuirtear Gaeilge san áireamh níos luaithe go mbeidh toradh an phróisis ceapacháin claonta tré a bheith ina bhfábhar siúd atá inniúil sa dá theanga oifigiúil. Táimid ag iarraidh go mbeadh níos mó daoine le Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís. Má táimid ag iarraidh béime a chur ar an nGaeilge, agus má tá próiseas á chur in áit le go mbeidh marcanna breise don Ghaeilge, cinnte beidh daoine ag cur i leith an choimisiúin go bhfuil sé claonta i dtreo na Gaeilge. Dhéanfaí an rud céanna dá n-iarrfaí go raibh Mandarin nó Gearmáinis ag teastáil. Má tá scil faoi leith ag teastáil le post a dhéanamh agus marcanna breise le fáil don scil sin, cinnte táthar ag dul a bheith claonta don rud sin. Is é an rud céanna é dá mbeadh duine ina innealtóir nó dá mbeadh aon scil eile aige.

Sin an bunphointe a bhí ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga. Is bunscil í an Ghaeilge. Tá an Coimisiún um Ceapachán Seirbhísí Poiblí, CCSP, in ainm is a bheith ag cur chun cinn na Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís, ó thaobh oibrithe de. Leis sin a dhéanamh, caithfear fábhar a thabhairt don Ghaeilge ins an bpróiseas earcaíochta. Sin adúirt Richie Ryan fadó agus sin riail an Choimisinéara Teanga. Tá sé aisteach go ndéarfadh an tUasal Patterson go dtabharfadh inniúil ar Ghaeilge fábhar breise.

Aontaím go hiomlán leis an Uasal Patterson agus, glacaim, an CCSP leis go gcaithfidh comhlachtaí seirbhísí poiblí dóthain ball foirne a bheith acu atá inniúil ar Ghaeilge chun a ndualgais a chomhlíonadh faoi Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla 2003, agus go bhfuil baint mhór ag na próisis earcaíochta agus ardú céime lena chinntiú go bhfuil dóthain de na baill foirne seo ag feidhmiú. Thagair an tUasal Patterson do "any statutory requirements". Nuair atá an próiseas á leagadh amach, agus eisean atá i gceannas an phróisis earcaíochta, caithfidh sé a thógail san áireamh any statutory requirements. Tá Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla mar cheann de na statutory requirements, chomh maith leis an Equality Act, an Organisation of Working Time Act agus aon cheann eile acu sin.

An aontaíonn an tUasal Patterson leis an mbreith a thug an Coimisinéir Teanga? Sa lá atá inniu ann, dá mbeadh sé ag leagan amach job specs nó próiseas earcaíochta agus Gaeilge ag teastáil, an dtógfadh sé san áireamh an bhreith a rinne an Coimisinéar Teanga agus an ndéarfadh sé leis na heagrais ar fad gur chóir go dtógfaí san áireamh an Ghaeilge ag tús an phróisis, seachas ag a dheireadh, mar sin a dúirt seisean ó thaobh Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

If Irish is a requirement of a job, people who are not proficient in Irish should not even be considered for the job. If there was a requirement to increase the number of people who are proficient in the Irish language in a Department, that would be a valid criterion and the CPSA would have no issue.

If a skills shortcoming is identified within the Department and Irish is set as a basic requirement, the Commission on Public Service Appointments, CPSA, would be happy for the Department to go further than the Coimisinéir Teanga's recommendation and exclude people who do not have that proficiency from further stages of the appointment process.

When I referred to the placement of emphasis on the Irish language I was expressing a concern on behalf of the commission that if Irish, although not an absolute requirement for the role, is taken into account at all the different stages in the appointment process - and there can be a pre-selection test, a short-listing and a final interview or a pre-selection test, a preliminary interview and a final interview - there is a risk that the final order of merit will be skewed against those who are, perhaps, stronger in all the other areas identified as important for the role.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

However, Mr. Patterson said Irish is part of the role. If a couple of languages were needed I might be better at Irish than at German, for example, and someone else might be better at German. People will not have equal skills.

Mr. Patterson said he audited one of the cases the commissioner looked into. Was Irish compulsory for that job or was it desirable? Given that he ruled that competence in Irish should have been taken into account at the beginning of the process in that situation, will the CPSA follow his direction from now on? He has ruled, as a language commissioner and ombudsman, that that practice should be followed. Is the CPSA now following that ruling?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

We looked at the appointment process and at standard practice over the past 37 years where Irish is only taken into account at the final stage. Candidates are interviewed, an order of merit is formed and only at that point are those with proficiency in the Irish language given additional credit. That is our understanding of the scheme that has been in operation.

We are concerned about situations where the Irish language is not identified as a requirement for the role. My recollection is that for these posts Irish was not identified as either an absolute requirement or a desirable criterion for the role, but that this was just being done in line with the scheme and with circulars from the Department of Finance. Our interpretation of that was that Irish should only be taken into account at the final stage of the process.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Mr. Patterson is saying the CPSA is disregarding the commissioner's ruling and going with the guidelines from the Departments.

The ruling in de Búrca v. an t-Aire Iompair and Others, deals with a similar situation. Does the CPSA have to take that legal precedent into account when advising Departments on recruitment?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

I understand from colleagues in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform that they will be addressing that point at the meeting.

Deputy Michael Conaghan

Am I right in thinking Mr. Patterson's interpretation is that Irish is but one among other criteria and is given due weight but that it has no absolute right over other criteria in terms of the profile of the job, and that the commissioner should see it in that practical context, as part of custom and practice established over a very long time?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

When we are looking at an appointment process, either examining a complaint or carrying out an audit, we look at the essential criteria and desirable criteria set down. Those should be the foundation point for the appointment process.

Deputy Michael Conaghan

How much Irish is required?

Mr. Andrew Patterson

In most cases Irish is not stated, either as essential or desirable. As such, we only look to see that the general scheme, as followed in the Civil Service for the last 37 years, as my colleagues from the Department of Social Protection have said, has been followed. Our interpretation has been consistent with that. It is not that Irish is seen as an essential or desirable criterion but that due recognition is given to those proficient in both official languages during the appointment process. The standard practice for that has been that 6% or 3% is added on at the final stage.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Anois, táimid chun iarraidh ar na hionadaithe ón Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe ráiteas a dhéanamh. Ansin, glacfaimid ceisteanna ón gchoiste agus tiocfaimid ar ais go dtí ionadaithe ón Choimisiún um Cheapacháin Seirbhíse Poiblí ag deireadh báire.

Ms Patricia Coleman

The committee has invited the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to discuss matters arising out of the investigation by An Coimisinéir Teanga on the awarding of bonus marks for proficiency in Irish in internal competitions in the Department of Social Protection. We thank the committee for the opportunity to clarify the policy position on the awarding of bonus marks for proficiency in the Irish language and will focus our comments on chapter 3 of both investigations.

In conformity with instructions from the secretariat and on foot of discussions with the committee clerk, we will not be commenting on those aspects of the investigations that cover issues currently under appeal to the Supreme Court.

It is useful to set out the responsibilities of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform in relation to the issues raised by An Coimisinéir Teanga. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has overall responsibility for the regulation of the Civil Service under section 17 of the Civil Service Regulation Act 1956. This includes specific responsibility for recruitment and promotion. The section is as follows:

17(1) The Minister shall be responsible for the following matters:

(a) the regulation and control of the Civil Service,

(b) the classification, re-classification, numbers and remuneration of civil servants,

(c) the fixing of

(i) the terms and conditions of service of civil servants, and

(ii) the conditions governing the promotion of civil servants.

(2) The Minister may, for the purpose of subsection (1) of this section, make such arrangements as he thinks fit and may cancel or vary those arrangements.

Under section 17(1), the Minister is responsible for, inter alia, the fixing of the conditions governing the promotion of civil servants. Crucially, under section 17(2), the Minister may, for the purpose of subsection (1), make such arrangements as he thinks fit and may cancel or vary those arrangements.

In relation to Irish language proficiency in the Civil Service, the Minister has, notably, exercised those powers under section 17(1)(c)(ii) on three occasions since 1975, by way of circulars and circular letters. The Government decided in 1974 that, inter alia, knowledge of Irish would no longer be obligatory for entry to Civil Service positions and would not be obligatory for eligibility for promotion. In November 1975, the then Department of the Public Service issued circular 43/75, setting out changes consequential on that decision. The circular provided that in promotion competitions credit would be available at a rate of 10%, subject to candidates having satisfied Irish qualification requirements. Circular 43/75, Irish Requirements in the Civil Service, provides that proficiency in Irish and English will be given equal credit in recruitment and establishment competitions and candidates can present in Irish or English or both. Those shown to be proficient in both languages were to get credit for this in determining the order of merit. In respect of promotion competitions, knowledge of Irish was to be one of the factors assessed in selecting staff for promotion.

In 1990, the Department of Finance issued circular 30/90, Credit for Proficiency in Both Irish and English in Confined Promotional Competitions. This varied the conditions applying to the language proficiency scheme. The circular provided that candidates would get a reduced credit for Irish at promotion competitions and that in order to get the credit they would have to re-sit the Irish qualification test from time to time.

Candidates were to receive a reduced 6% credit, as distinct from the former 10%, if they had undergone an appropriate test in the preceding five years but only 3% if they had taken the test between five and ten years previously.

In November 2005, a letter to personnel officers issued from the Department of Finance, which clarified conditionality in the application of the arrangements of the Irish language proficiency scheme. The clarification confirmed that Departments have discretion in the application of circulars 43/75 and 30/90 for the purposes of internal competitions only.

An Coimisinéir Teanga's investigation is constructed around two key questions. First, are bonus marks an option for the Department in internal competitions and, second, at what stage of the promotion process are bonus marks awarded? An Coimisinéir Teanga, in his investigation, contends that "Government Departments have no choice but to award bonus marks appropriately under the provisions of the circular in internal competitions". He contends that it is a statutory requirement for Government Departments, including the Department of Social Protection, to award bonus marks for language competence in internal competitions, as set out in circulars 43/75 and 30/90. In reaching this conclusion An Coimisinéir Teanga relied on the Laffoy judgment in the case of de Búrca v. an t-Aire Iompair agus Eile. The judgment ruled that Irish bonus marks should be applied to internal competitions. As this judgment is the subject of an appeal to the Supreme Court, "in finding that the provisions of circular 43/75 and 30/90 apply to internal competitions for promotion" I do not intend to comment further or in any way that could prejudice those proceedings.

With regard to the second question about the point in the selection process where bonus marks for Irish language proficiency are applied, An Coimisinéir Teanga concluded that the relevant circulars "do not permit the awarding of bonus marks to be limited to those who obtain places on a panel following interview and that they should not be awarded simply to determine the final order of merit of candidates".

Paragraph 1(d) of circular 43/75 provides that a knowledge of Irish will be one of factors that will be assessed in selecting staff for promotion. While the circulars are not prescriptive on the point in the selection processes at which the marks are to be applied, the custom and practice for the last 37 years is to apply the marks at the order of merit stage in the process. We have found no single case of a deviation from this practice in our searches to date on this issue. Having consulted with the Public Appointments Service, PAS, it has been confirmed that this approach has been followed in past competitions and by the Civil Service Commission before 2004, when the PAS was established, and it has always been the case that credit for proficiency in Irish is applied at the final stage of the competition, at the formulation of the final order of merit.

Recruitment policy has always sought to identify the best people for the job. Candidates who demonstrate the required skills and competencies for the post and meet all the essential requirements, as set out in the job description, are placed in an order of merit assessed by an interview board in line with recruitment best practice. Bonus marks for Irish proficiency are then applied to determine the final order of merit for the panel. Any moves to apply bonus marks at an earlier stage would have been resisted by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform as it would run the risk of the appointment of candidates who do not have the essential competencies or criteria for the post.

We have worked closely with the PAS and the office of the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commission over the years in pursuit of excellence in the selection and appointments process. We are satisfied that awarding additional marks for candidates with Irish proficiency at the final panel placement stage is both consistent with effective recruitment policy and meets the requirements of paragraph 1(d) of circular 43/75. Where Irish is required to perform the duties of a post, Irish proficiency is assessed as a core competency in the relevant competition.

Policy determination in this area has always sought to balance Irish language requirements with the need to ensure that the Civil Service has the right people with the requisite skills and competencies in place. This is the guiding principle underpinning promotion policy expressed in circulars and letters issued by this Department.

I hope the foregoing clarifies the position in respect of the issues we have been permitted to address today, and I thank the members of the committee for their attention.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Beidh go leor cairde agam sa dá Roinn seo nuair a bhéas muid críochnaithe, ar aon nós.

Tá mé thar a bheith buíoch do Iníon Uí Coleman as na freagraí a thug sí. Má táimid leis an aidhm seo a bhaint amach, ó thaobh daoine le Gaeilge a earcadh don Stát Seirbhís, cén polasaí atá ag an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe le sin a dhéanamh? Cén chaoi a bhfuil an Roinn chun é sin a chinntiú? Cé mhéad duine atá fostaithe sa Státseirbhís faoi láthair a bhfuil Gaeilge ar a dtoil acu agus gur féidir leo seirbhís a sholáthar, mar is léir go bhfuil sin titithe siar? Mar shampla, níl ach 1.5% de na daoine atá ag plé le cúrsaí riaracháin sa Roinn Oideachais agus Scileanna ábalta a gcuid oibre a dhéanamh tré mheán na Gaeilge. Ar an gCeathrú Rua, mar shampla, ní féidir leis an Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí daoine a chur ar fáil le Gaeilge le freastal ar phobal na Gaeltachta. Tá fadhb leanúnach ann.

Deir Iníon Uí Coleman go bhfuil an t-Aire freagrach, faoi alt 17(1) den Civil Service Regulation Act 1956, as na coinníollacha a shocrú a rialaíonn ardú céime do státseirbhísigh. Tá mé ag glacadh leis go gcaithfidh sé é sin a dhéanamh faoi réir dhlí na tíre. Dúirt sé liom, nuair a bhíomar ag plé an Ombudsman (Amendment) Bill sa Seanad coicís ó shin, nach ndéanfadh seisean aon rialú a bhrisfeadh nó a sharódh dlí na tíre. Tá Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla mar dhlí na tíre. Mar sin, in aon treoir a thabharfadh an tAire chaithfeadh sé Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla a thógáil san áireamh.

Is é seo an pointe bunúsach atá á dhéanamh ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga. Deir oifigí na Ranna nach bhfuil na ciorcláin daingean, nó prescriptive, maidir leis an bpointe sa phróiseas ardú céime inar chóir na marcanna a dháileadh. Ach an pointe a rinne an Coimisinéir sa chás a thóg sé ná go raibh na ciorcláin prescriptive. Tá easaontú iomlán idir eisean agus na Ranna ar an bpointe sin. Dar leis an gCoimisinéir, sin an áit a bhfuil an fhadhb.

Tá a fhios agam nach bhfuil na hoifigigh in ann labhairt faoi chás atá os comhair na cúirte, per se, ach tá rialú déanta sa chás de Búrca v an tAire Iompair agus Eile gur cheart marcanna bónais don Ghaeilge a aidhmiú i gcomórtais inmheánacha. Ó tógadh an cás sin, ar thóg na Ranna an breithiúnas sin ar bord ó thaobh an phróisis earcaíochta atá ar siúl acu?

Deir na hoifigí go bhféachtar le cothromaíocht a bhaint amach idir riachtanais na Gaeilge agus an gá atá ann lena chinntiú go bhfuil na daoine cuí leis na scileanna agus na hinniúlachtaí is gá in áit ag an Státseirbhís. Cuireann sé iontas orm gur dúradh go mb'fhéidir go bhfostófaí daoine nach mbeadh na scileanna agus na hinniúlachtaí cuí acu dá dtabharfaí tús áite don duine le Gaeilge. Chaith mise blianta ag plé le próisis earcaíochta sa saol poiblí agus sa saol príobháideach agus muna raibh duine cumasach go leor leis an jab a dhéanamh ní bhfuair sé an jab. Dá bhrí sin, ní ghlacaim leis go gceapfaí duine le Gaeilge nach raibh inniúil sa scileanna eile a bhí ag teastáil, agus ní dóigh liom go nglacfadh oifigigh na Ranna leis sin ach an oiread. Dhéanfaí athfhógairt ar an bpost go dtí go bhfaighfí duine leis na scileanna atá ag teastáil. Sin an cleachtas atá ann agus ní ghlacaim leis an argóint dá dtabharfaí marcanna ag tús an phróisis do dhuine le Gaeilge go bhféadfadh sé dul chun cinn ar dhuine le scileanna breise sna réimsí eile a bhí ag teastáil. Muna raibh na scileanna cuí ar fad ag duine ní bheadh sé ag fáil an chonartha nó an post, glacaim leis. Ní ghlacaim leis an argóint sin.

Tá trí aighneacht cloiste againn. Ón méid atá cloiste agam, níl na hoifigigh ag glacadh, a bheag nó a mhór, le rialú an Choimisinéara Teanga. Sin rud a chuireann imní orm. An gciallaíonn sé sin nach nglacann siad leis an údarás atá aige mar dhuine neamhspleách atá le rialú ar na ceisteanna seo? Muna bhfuil, an bhfuil siad ag tógáil an údaráis ó áit éigin eile? An gceapann siad go ndearna an Coimisinéir Teanga botún? An raibh sé mícheart? Má bhí, cén fáth nár thóg an Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí nó an Roinn Caiteachais Phoiblí agus Athchóirithe cás Árd Chúirte? Is é an próiseas atá leagtha síos sa reachtaíocht, muna bhfuil Roinn sásta leis an mbreith atá ag an gCoimisinéir Teanga go dtógfadh sé dúshlán sa gCúirt Uachtarach. Ní fheicim go bhfuil sin déanta.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Tá roinnt ceisteanna agam. Cuirfidh mé an cheist seo as Béarla toisc gur tugadh an fhianaise as Béarla and because I would like clarification of some of the terms used in the presentation.

Ms Coleman referred in the presentation to recruitment competitions, establishment competitions and promotion competitions. What are the differences in those competitions or are they different terms for the same competition?

In describing the effect of circular 43/75 Ms Coleman stated that those shown to be proficient in both languages were to get credit for that in determining the order of merit. The phrase "order of merit" is not used in the same context in the circular. The circular uses the phrase "in selecting staff for promotion". Are there different nuances in regard to that? Also, the term "confined promotion competition" is used in the description of the circular. A greater definition of that would help members in our determinations as a committee. The term "internal competitions" is used in the description of the November 2005 letter to the personnel officers. Can Ms Coleman explain where the discretion in the application of circular 45/75 and circular 30/90 for the purposes of internal competitions was originally provided for and how the need for clarification arose?

In the discretion, to which Ms Coleman referred, in regard to whether the circulars should apply to internal competition or that they could be varied for purposes of local competitions or both, I would like her to clarify those. If she does not have the clarification today, she might send a reply in writing to the committee to ensure that when we deliberate on this we use the terms in the appropriate use suggested in her statement and in the circulars originally.

Ms Patricia Coleman

The Deputy has asked a number of questions and he might forgive me if I do not remember them all. To start with the latter ones, circular 43/75, which is the original circular, is clear in regard to recruitment and establishment competitions. It defines that the Irish will apply in determining the order of merit. Recruitment competitions are open recruitment competitions that are advertised. Establishment competitions relate to people who have been brought into the Civil Service who may have been appointed in an unestablished capacity who then had an opportunity to convert to an established capacity. That explains those two terms.

The issue regarding internal promotional competitions is that the circular was not prescriptive in terms of the order of merit. Those words were not included in the circular but, as I said earlier, the practice for the past 37 years has been that this is the way Irish proficiency marks have been applied, at the final order of merit stage. This was the policy of the Department. We were satisfied that it was the correct way to apply the policy. At the end of the day there is an onus on us in terms of resourcing and recruitment policy to ensure we get the best people into the Civil Service and that they are fully competent to carry out the duties. As my colleagues in the CPSA and in the PAS have outlined in their submissions to the committee, we are required to ensure that we get the best people in, and in recruitment processes that we define the skills and competencies for particular posts when we are recruiting. If Irish is specified as a core competency for a particular job, then it would be assessed as part of the recruitment or promotion process. It would be one of the competences that would be adjudicated on in the selection process at the interview stage or the earlier stages.

I am trying to remember the Acting Chairman's other questions. The High Court case - the de Búrca challenge - related to the application of Irish proficiency in a particular competition and as it happened it was not a promotion competition and there are issues there. I do not want to go into the detail of the case because we will be before the Supreme Court on appeal. An Coimisinéir Teanga's main focus seems to be on the point or stage in the competition at which the Irish is applied, which is not an issue that is addressed in the de Búrca case. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has legal responsibility for establishing the terms and conditions for the Civil Service. The circulars are clear in regard to recruitment and establishment competitions in terms of the point in the process where the proficiency for Irish is applied. It is not prescriptive in regard to the others but the custom and practice for 37 years, which is a significant period, has been that it is applied at the final order of merit stage, and we are satisfied that this is the correct approach to adopt.

It is fair to say that An Coimisinéir Teanga is the regulator in regard to Irish language and we fully accept that role. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has a statutory responsibility in determining the terms and conditions for civil servants and in varying and changing those if required.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

I appreciate that Ms Coleman cannot go into the details of the case but there has been the case of de Búrca v. An tAire Iompair. Has there been any other similar cases where people have sought compensation for the language not been taken into consideration in promotions or have any compensatory payments been made to people from the Department in situations such as that? I take it Ms Coleman is telling me that the Minister considers he can disregard the ruling of the language commissioner because of his position as a Minister under the other Act. I reaffirm that the fundamental point that the commissioner made in his report was that he did believe the circulars were prescriptive. He indicated that in the report and said that they should be followed. What is the policy of the Department to ensure that we have Irish speakers throughout the system and what is Ms Coleman's proactive way of promoting that?

Ms Patricia Coleman

Regarding the commissioner's ruling, we attempted to meet the commissioner along with my colleagues in the PAS and the CPSA to discuss this issue. There is a key role for the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in applying and rolling out the policy on Irish language proficiency. At the time he declined to engage with us at that point.

In regard to improving the capacity within the Civil Service in terms of doing business through Irish, we are very supportive of that and we are very supportive of the role of An Coimisinéir Teanga. The advent of the 2003 legislation and the requirement for Departments to have schemes have had an influence in this regard in terms of Departments defining what services they will be providing in both languages and what publications will be produced. Looking back over our figures, in 2002 there was roughly a 50-50 split of Departments applying the Irish language proficiency requirement in internal competitions, by 2006 that had increased to about two thirds and, currently, my information is that the vast majority of Departments - up to perhaps 80% - are applying Irish language proficiency testing in internal competitions.

Irish language proficiency is only one element in trying to improve skills across the system; training and upskilling are key elements as well.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Would it be possible to get details on the number of people across the public service who can carry out their daily work through Irish and if there are any strategies or targets to make sure the number is increased over the years?

I also asked about compensation. Have other people taken cases and been compensated because of language issues in the recruitment process, cases that might not have gone to court?

Ms Patricia Coleman

I am aware of one case, although I am not sure of the details, that was settled.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

The Coimisinéir Teanga disagrees with the Departments' opinion. It is open for those who took the case to the Coimisinéir Teanga to go to court about this. If they went to court and won their case, it could open the door for more cases to be taken from other people who would feel they were not treated properly in the recruitment process regarding the Irish language. Is there a worry on the part of the Civil Service human resources directorate about that? As a result of a failure to implement the suggestions of the Coimisinéir Teanga, the State could be open for many more cases to be taken against it.

Ms Patricia Coleman

In the particular case involving the Department of Social Protection, the Irish language proficiency testing was applied in the internal competitions. People who had the proficiency did have access to those bonus marks at the final order of merit stage. The question at issue is that the Coimisinéir Teanga has a different view of the point in the process those marks should be applied. Looking at both of his reports, his view on what point in the process they should be applied is not clear.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

It states clearly that it should be at the beginning of the process. Does the HR directorate disagree fundamentally with his opinion?

Ms Patricia Coleman

Yes, and the policy which has been clearly elucidated over 37 years is that it is applied at the final order of merit stage, and this ties in with our requirements laid down by the other regulator, the CPSA, in terms of recruiting the best people for the job and fairness, equity and openness. We must have people in the Civil Service who are fully competent and capable of doing the job. Under the schemes, Departments know what services they must provide in Irish and the number of people that they need who have those proficiencies and can provide services in Irish. That is then a matter for them.

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

As a practical example, we recently had a promotion competition and applied the Irish provision, as we do, at the final merit stage. One individual, as a result of having the Irish, moved eight places on the panel. He benefited greatly from having it, as did others. If we had not had that at a cut-off point, an individual could have been promoted who did not display the competencies for that job. It was only in that case they must have completed all the competencies in terms of leadership management skills, all of the requirements for senior positions, before the bonus marks for Irish are applied. It was of huge benefit to those who were on the panel because they made significant moves on the panel as a result of having Irish.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Should Irish not be one of the prerequisites for any of the senior positions in the Civil Service?

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

No, Senator.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Would it not be desirable, if we are trying to promote Irish, that it should be given a weighting that would encourage those with Irish?

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

We give the weighting at the final stage but they must have clearly displayed all the competencies.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Was Irish included in the initial job specification for that?

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

No.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Bogfaimid ar aghaidh chuig an duine deireanach. Tá brón orm faoin moill ag teacht chuige, ón tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí, Mr. Pádraig Love.

Mr. Pádraig Love

I am in attendance at the request of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to represent the Public Appointments Service.

The Public Appointments Service was also established under the Public Service Management (Recruitment and Appointments) Act 2004 as the centralised recruitment, assessment and selection body for the public service. The Public Appointments Service took over the operational aspects of recruitment and selection previously exercised by the office of the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commissioners. In the course of the transition between organisations, PAS retained most of the staff and the organisational knowledge of the earlier bodies.

The relevance of this is that the PAS and, prior to that, the offices of the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commissioners, has been the body primarily responsible for the application of the provision of additional credit for Irish proficiency, as provided for in the Department of Finance Circulars 43/75 and 30/90. PAS has been administering this scheme since its inception in 1975 where it has applied to open recruitment and interdepartmental promotion competitions.

PAS runs assessment processes in a manner that ensures standards of probity, merit, equity and fairness are achieved. The fundamental building block for this is the identification in advance of the range of skills and competencies required for effective performance. It is essential that any candidate who is placed on the final order of merit has demonstrated satisfactorily that he meets the required standard for all of these skills and competencies. In certain instances proficiency in Irish may be set as an essential requirement but in the majority of cases, bonus marks are awarded for demonstrated proficiency.

The scheme for awarding additional marks for demonstrating language proficiency in Irish is intended to introduce an additional distinguishing factor between candidates who clearly meet all of the essential criteria, thereby allowing those with competence in Irish to achieve a higher placing on the panel. For this reason, the credit for Irish proficiency is added to the overall marks after the final order of merit based on the scores awarded for essential skills and competencies is determined by the interview board. Awarding credit at an earlier stage would risk the appointment of a candidate who does not fully meet the essential criteria. This has been the manner of application of this scheme since its inception in 1975. The Public Appointments Service has worked closely with the relevant Departments, the CPSA, the Department of Finance and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, in the intervening years to ensure the scheme is always applied in the manner directed by the Minister.

The PAS recognises the role of the Coimisinéir Teanga and would be happy to work with him in looking at ways to foster the competence in the Irish language through the selection process. The service was slightly surprised that the Coimisinéir Teanga did not engage in any consultation on the matter in the course of his investigation.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

An bhfuil ceist ag an Seanadóir Ó Clochartaigh?

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Níor mhaith liom é a fhágáil amach, an fear bocht. Tá sé ráite anseo, má thugtar creidiúint d’iarrthóir níos luaithe, tá an baol ann go gceapfaí iarrthóir nach bhfuil na cáilíochtaí riachtanacha aige nó aici. Glacaim leis in aon phost go bhfuil bunriachtanais ann, ar nós ceadúnas tiomána a bheith ag iarrthóir, nó céim nó mar sin. Ní fheicim cén chaoi gur féidir le haon duine nach bhfuil na buncháilíochtaí acu a cheapadh. Chuirfí Gaeilgeoir chun tosaigh mar gheall ar Ghaeilge a bheith aige, nach é sin an buntáiste a bhíomar ag iarraidh a thabhairt agus an rud a bhí i gceist ag Richie Ryan ó thús?

Maidir leis an teagmháil leis an gCoimisinéir Teanga, de réir mar a thuigim, an cás a bhí i gceist, ardú céime inmheánach a bheadh ann. An bhfuil an tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí ag baint le arduithe céime inmheánacha? Thuig mé nach bhfuil agus is féidir gur sin an fáth nach mbeadh an Coimisinéir i dteagmháil, mar baineann an tseirbhís le foireann nua.

Ceist níos ginearálta, an bhfuil aon taighde nó measúnú déanta ag an tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí ar chumas Gaeilge na Státseirbhíse faoi láthair? An bhfuil forbhreathnú ar an réimse ar fad ar cén áit a dteastaíonn an Ghaeilge, cé mhéad duine a bheadh ar an Stát a earcú le déanamh cinnte gur féidir na seirbhísí a chur a fáil. Má tá taighde ann, cé chomh minic agus a dhéantar é, cén toradh a bhí ar an taighde sin le déanaí agus an féidir an taighde féin a chur ar fáil dúinn?

I bhfianaise an cháis chúirte, de Búrca v. an Aire Iompair, an ndearnadh athbhreithniú ar na treoirlínte a chuireann an tseirbhís ar fáil?

Míníodh ceist na marcanna bónais dom ach an nglacann an tSeirbhís um Cheapacháin Phoiblí leis an mbreith an thug an Coimisinéir Teanga nó an gceapann an tUasal Love ach an oiread leis an dream eile a bhí anseo go bhfuil sé mícheart sa bhreith atá tugtha aige nó an bhfuil an ceart aige sa chás áirithe a tugadh maidir leis an Roinn Coimirce Sóisialaí?

Ó thaobh chur chun cinn na Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís, tá mé ag glacadh leis nach bhfuil an céatadán an-ard faoi láthair. Sa PSNI ó Thuaidh, nuair a bhí na húdaráis ag iarraidh líon na gCaitliceach a mhéadú san eagras sin, cuireadh cineál córais “affirmative action” i bhfeidhm. An mbeadh an tseirbhís ag moladh go ndéanfaí a leithéid sin chun caighdeán na Gaeilge sa Státseirbhís a ardú go tapaidh arís go mbeadh líon mór daoine a bheadh inniúil ar an nGaeilge a chur chun cinn?

Céard é an tuairim a bheadh ag an Uasal Love faoi sin? Céard é a bharúil faoi chumas na Státseirbhíse seirbhís i nGaeilge a sholáthar faoi láthair? Tá pobal na Gaeilge an-cháinteach nach bhfuil daoine le Gaeilge le fáil sna Ranna éagsúla. Tuigim go bhfuil fadhbanna eile sa Státseirbhís, ach tá daoine an-cháinteach.

Ar nós an sampla a thug mé den Cheathrú Rua, áit nach bhfuil oifigeach leasa shóisialaí in ann feidhmiú as Gaeilge, tá gardaí i dTír Chonaill nach bhfuil in ann a gcuid oibre a dhéanamh trí mheán na Gaeilge. An bhfuil an státchóras ag brú Béarla ar mhuintir na Gaeltachta?

Mr. Pádraig Love

I will try to address the questions the Senator has raised. First, it is not our function to examine the overall standards of the Irish language. However, if a Department perceives that it has a need - either from its own research or from comments from An Coimisinéir Teanga on the performance against its scheme - we will be quite happy to introduce a competition which would favour people with the Irish language, and have done so on many occasions over the years. The last time we had a competition which was specifically focused on people with competence in Irish was in 2007 for executive officers and clerical officers. Unfortunately, the response from applicants with that competence was low. We had about 113 applicants for the executive officer position, of which only about 68 came to sit tests. With regard to the clerical officer position, there were 126 applicants and only about 60 came to sit tests. There is therefore an issue that is wider than just the immediate Civil Service, because they were national competitions which would have been publicised through our website.

As regards the demand for Irish and how it is being fulfilled, we would not have a role in specifically identifying that. We are fully in compliance with our scheme in relation to meeting the Irish and English requirements of people who wish to apply for Civil Service posts. It would be fair to say, however, that despite the efforts we have made, of those candidates who have an actual registered identity on our website, only 0.62% of those have expressed an interest in doing their transactions through Irish.

Of those who have applied for competitions over the past three years, only 0.26% of all applications we have received have been done on that basis. That is with full backing, so there are issues regarding the level of demand that would manifest itself, certainly for ourselves, although I am not quite sure about other Departments.

As regards the PSNI, we would not be averse to having a scheme which would foster or encourage people with Irish to apply. It would have to be done in the context of them meeting the overall standards in relation to all the posts. In the course of our recruitment, we also look after professional posts, including medical consultants and engineers. The Irish scheme equally applies to them in recruiting for posts. Clearly, however, a medical consultant has to meet the medical requirements and cannot be brought over that hurdle by their competence in Irish. So that tension is there all the time - that one is trying to get the best people in. There is no direct conflict between people with or without Irish in terms of meeting those competencies. Obviously, there are some people who may have Irish who will not clear all the hurdles that are required to get in.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

What about Mr. Love's own opinion on the commissioner's report?

Mr. Pádraig Love

As regards the commissioner's report, it is not the way we would apply it. We would always see that it is important to test the core competencies first and then apply Irish. I can see how one could apply Irish earlier but, as my colleague from the Commission for Public Service Appointments has said, it would distort the field in that people who are strongest in the core competencies would be pushed down, or perhaps out of, the field whereas people who might be weaker in the core competencies but have Irish would come up through the field. Given that our role is to try to get the best people into jobs in the Civil Service, that would not be consistent with the way we go about our business.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Was that not the idea that the former Minister for Finance, Richie Ryan, had - that by applying it in that way, one is fostering people who will come forward with the Irish language? One is giving them a positive bias in the process in that it will bring more people through with Irish, which is what we are looking for, but obviously they have to fulfil the core competencies.

Mr. Pádraig Love

I think we are coming at it from two different ends. We would identify the core competencies first and then give benefit to people with Irish. As my colleague from the Department of Social Protection said, over the years it has made many people improve their position on panels and they would have obtained jobs that they might not otherwise have got. There is, however, always a base level that people have to reach before one can apply that. If one applies that same base level, irrespective of whether it is applied at the outset or at the end of a competition, one should end up with broadly the same people.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

It was proven by An Coimisinéir Teanga, however, that that was not the case. There were at least two people in the Department of Social Protection to whom that did not happen and there could be a number of others. How does one take the relationship with the Ombudsman? If there was a ruling from one of the other ombudsmen, would one take the same view that one could almost take it or leave it? If the Minister says we are not going to run with something, does one not run with it? Is his finding not binding by law?

Mr. Pádraig Love

I do not think his findings are binding. Obviously, we will take full account of what An Coimisinéir Teanga or other ombudsmen have to say in the context of the greater legal position around Civil Service appointments. My colleague from the Commission for Public Service Appointments could equally well impose a ruling on us following which we could end up dealing with the joint committee about it as well. Equally, the Ombudsman would also make rulings from time to time. We would always take them on board once it does not conflict with directions we are getting from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.

Dr. Orlaigh Quinn

The two individuals did not have the competencies for the job. One failed the first round and did not get through to the second interview. The second person did get through but then failed that second interview. Therefore, they were not deemed to be suitable for the job. If the Irish had been applied, in a way it actually proves the distortion that if they had been on the panel without those core competencies, it would have created great difficulties for the Department. They had to have those competencies and I do not want to comment on the individuals in particular, but that is the very basic fundamental part of any competition.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Could I quickly ask a question again that nobody has answered? The process in law is that if one does not agree with the ruling of the commissioner, one has to appeal it to the High Court. Why has nobody done that? Is that not the process?

Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh

I think I did answer that point for the Department earlier, as Gaeilge. We felt we were not an appropriate body to go to the High Court on a matter such as this because it is not our sole competence to do this. We apply the rules as set down by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. Frankly, it would be bizarre if our Department went to the High Court on a matter that is actually the functional responsibility of another Minister. That would have given rise to great difficulties.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Did the commissioner not indicate to the Department that that was the appeals process if it was not happy with his ruling?

Mr. Brian Ó Raghallaigh

We were fully aware of the arrangement and the commissioner was invited to engage with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. As that Department has indicated, he declined to do so.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Did he not indicate that while he had heard all the evidence, the next step was to take an appeal to the High Court? Was that indicated? If it was not for the Department of Social Protection then surely it was for the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to take that on.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

We must move on.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Gabh mo leithscéal ach tá sé tábhachtach.

Ms Patricia Coleman

At the end of the day, an appeal can only be on a point of law and it has to be made within a very short period of time. One must also have regard to the high cost of High Court appeals. Our approach would have been that this is an issue appropriate to engagement with An Coimisinéir Teanga, the Public Appointments Service and the Commission for Public Service Appointments in terms of possibly bringing the issue forward. He has a different interpretation of when Irish language marks should be applied in terms of the internal promotion competition process. His interpretation is not in line with the policy that has been adopted by the Department for a very consistent period of years and in line with the approach that we feel is appropriate.

Following on from what my colleague from the Department of Social Protection has said, it is critical for us to ensure people who are promoted to positions in the Civil Service have the full range of competencies for the job. It is always open in relation to any particular post, if there is a requirement for Irish language skills for that particular job, that that would be assessed as part of the promotion process, as distinct from the Irish bonus marks at the end of the day.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

However, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform does appeal cases to the courts.

Ms Patricia Coleman

That is a separate case and the question of at what stage of the process the bonus marks are applied is not part of that appeal. There is a wide range of issues involved in that appeal and I do not want to go into it here but suffice to say that actual case did not involve a promotion competition.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh)

Ag an staid seo, ba mhaith liom buíochas a ghabháil libh ar fad as bhur bhfoighne agus the patience shown in regard to interruptions. Mo bhuíochas libh. Tá seo spéisiúil. Níl sé críochnaithe agus sin an fáth go bhfuil sé os comhair an choiste againn. We are not finished. Obviously, that is the reason we have had the specific hearings to look further into the matter.

A number of issues arose that may have been lost in translation and therefore in the next week or so I ask the witnesses to read the transcript when we supply it and if questions were asked that were not fully answered or if there are additional clarifications on what they stated in response to questions, I would be grateful if they could be forwarded to the committee for circulation.

Mention was made of an audit report from the commission. I ask that that be sent to the committee. One or two other issues arose such as the question of whether there are plans to increase the competency in the Irish language within the Civil Service. I ask that that information be supplied.

I also ask that details of the number of people in the different sections of the public service who have competency to conduct their business in Irish be given. I understand Senator Ó Clochartaigh must leave but I thank the witnesses for their patience and for their contributions. We will be in contact with them in time.

The joint committee adjourned at 7.35 p.m. until 4 p.m. on Wednesday, 21 November 2012.