The purpose of the Bill can be stated very briefly. It is to provide that a judge of the High Court, Mr. Justice Feargus Flood, who was appointed to the Bench on 1 October 1991, will qualify for full pension of one half of salary when he reaches retirement age on 9 July, notwithstanding the fact that he will not have the full 15 years service required for full pension entitlements. The new provision applies only to the High Court and one judge of that court. The question of extending this new provision to the other serving judges of the High Court does not arise.
Mr. Justice Flood has been engaged on a wholetime basis since November 1997 as chairman and sole member of the tribunal of inquiry into certain planning matters – the Flood tribunal. Mr. Justice Flood has agreed in the public interest to remain on in this position after his retirement as a judge at the age of 72. It is impossible to say at this stage how long the tribunal will last but it is anticipated that his services will be required for some considerable time.
I am sure all sides of the House will agree that the tribunal has carried out its work in an exemplary manner and that its contribution has been invaluable in trying to arrive at the truth concerning the matters set out in the terms of reference. The chairman's role has been a particularly onerous one. Since the tribunal began its work almost three years ago it has sifted through an enormous amount of written material and spent many days hearing evidence from witnesses. To date more than 200 people have been interviewed by the tribunal in this regard and hundreds more have been spoken to or communicated with by members of the legal team. The tribunal has received a huge number of documents and files from various planning authorities, Departments and financial institutions within the State. All this has been carried out under the stewardship of the Honourable Mr. Justice Feargus Flood who deserves our thanks. It sometimes behoves the State to recognise in a more practical way the efforts individuals have made and continue to make for public affairs. This is one such case.
On a more general level, I am sure it is widely accepted that in considering appointments to the Judiciary, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board and the Government should have open to them the widest possible field of selection. In many instances the acceptance of such appointments – I must be blunt here – means that the people involved accept large reductions in current income. This has not deterred distinguished legal practitioners from accepting judicial appointment and they have served the State well.
In the area of pensions, because they have taken up duty on the Bench relatively late in their careers, some of these judges have not accrued the necessary years of service which is required to receive the maximum pension entitlements. In the specific case which is the subject of this legislation, the judge in question is just over six years short of the necessary 15 years which would entitle him to a full pension. He has, in the interests of completing the work of the tribunal efficiently and effectively, agreed, at the request of the Government, to continue on as Chairman until the work is completed. I believe that a commitment such as this should be acknowledged in a tangible way.
In money terms the Bill provides that Mr. Justice Flood's current pension entitlement will increase by over £20,000 per annum, up to £45,715. His retirement lump sum will be increased by just over £64,000, up to £137,145, based on current salary. These payments will be made immediately on the judge's retirement on 9 July next. His total remuneration, that is, pension and salary, will continue at the level of that of a High Court judge for the duration of his chairmanship of the tribunal.
As I mentioned earlier, the Bill has been brought before the House to deal with an individual case. Other judges are not involved. I believe that this adjustment is well deserved and, as such, I commend the Bill to the House.
