Skip to main content
Normal View

Programme for Government

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 10 July 2018

Tuesday, 10 July 2018

Questions (1, 2, 3)

Micheál Martin

Question:

1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the actions he has taken to strengthen Cabinet accountability as outlined in A Programme for a Partnership Government; if the examination of the role of Ministers of State has been completed; and if it will be published. [26881/18]

View answer

Brendan Howlin

Question:

2. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Taoiseach the actions taken to strengthen Cabinet accountability as outlined in A Programme for a Partnership Government; and if a report will be published on the outcome of the examination of the role of Ministers of State. [29005/18]

View answer

Martin Heydon

Question:

3. Deputy Martin Heydon asked the Taoiseach the steps taken to promote Cabinet accountability as outlined in A Programme for a Partnership Government. [30990/18]

View answer

Oral answers (50 contributions)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.

The Government recently approved the annual report setting out progress on the programme for Government. It sets out detailed progress since May 2017 on commitments being implemented across government. It will be published shortly and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

In addition to delegation orders that assign responsibility for specific statutory functions, I have also assigned Ministers of State specific responsibilities. Following the appointment of Ministers of State, a set of policy priorities was agreed between me, as Taoiseach, Cabinet Ministers and Ministers of State. On the establishment of the Government, I met each Minister and his or her Ministers of State on a bilateral basis to discuss their short, medium and long-term policy priorities. I have since regularly met Ministers of State to receive their updates on the progress they have made in implementing their programme for Government priorities.

This collaborative model is operating effectively in the Oireachtas, with the Business Committee managing the weekly Dáil business and the new Parliamentary Budget Office established to provide independent and impartial information, analysis and advice for the Oireachtas. The cross-party group on Seanad reform held its first meeting in May and recently I met the Chairmen of all Oireachtas committees to discuss a wide range of issues relevant to their work.

The Taoiseach and his predecessor entered office claiming that they would implement a new approach to accountability for Ministers. In fact, the Taoiseach's predecessor said he would have annual score cards for Ministers, which never materialised. In the Taoiseach's case, we were told that he would hold Ministers to account very closely for their delivery. Has he looked at the work of all of his Ministers? Is he happy there are no issues of concern?

On specifics, despite the number of times the Taoiseach and the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, might put on a high visibility jacket, it must be acknowledged that the failure to deliver in the area of housing illustrates a lack of accountability within the Government in meeting the targets the Government set itself.

Seven or eight various schemes have been announced in the past three years and the targets outlined for all those schemes, from repair and lease to rapid build to the affordable homes loans and so on, were not reached. The bottom line is that the facts now paint a different picture from the rhetoric and soundbites emanating from the Government relating to housing, particularly the fact that homelessness is up 24% since the Taoiseach and the Minister took office last year. Child homelessness is up an astonishing 32% in the same period, with almost 1,000 more children homeless. That is unacceptable and represents a clear failure to deliver. Last November, the Taoiseach declared, "We have a plan and it's working", but since his announcement, approximately 500 more children have become homeless. Is he happy with that record?

What are his views on the progress on disability matters by the Minister of State with responsibility for the area, Deputy Finian McGrath? I particularly refer to access to therapies, respite care and mental health matters, which I outlined earlier, and the problems with CAMHS? The Minister of State at the Department for Health, Deputy Jim Daly, is responsible for home care packages so will the Taoiseach comment on the lack of any transparent assessment of needs in that area and the real crisis emerging there?

In the programme for Government there is a reference to strengthening Cabinet accountability, stating the Government will support an enhanced approach by Ministers of State playing a more substantive role in decision-making. Will the Taoiseach explain exactly how that has been achieved? The document also indicates the Government will consider the creation of unpaid parliamentary private secretaries. I am unsure whether any Fine Gael Deputies do not have a job currently. I suppose the former Taoiseach or Minister for Finance could hardly take on a role as a parliamentary private secretary, although maybe they will. Perhaps it was the idea of the Taoiseach's predecessor but has he thought about it and is there a role for a parliamentary private secretary, which the programme for Government indicates would examine the balance of power and responsibility between Government and the Civil Service? I am not sure how exactly that would happen.

There is a commitment in the programme for Government for all Ministers to appear before the relevant Oireachtas committee on a quarterly basis. Will the Taoiseach indicate whether that has been achieved? There is an indication that the Taoiseach would appear before the Working Group of Committee Chairmen twice per year. Has he done that? Is that commitment being adhered to? In a general sense, there are 19 Ministers of State, which is as many as we have ever had in any Government. Was there 21 at one stage?

The law was changed.

It is not possible to have 21. It is contrary to the Constitution.

No, the Ministers are fixed by the Constitution but Ministers of State are fixed by law. Is the law still that 21 are allowed but there are just 19? Did we change the law? I cannot remember.

I believe it allows 20 and we have 19. I will check that.

Have they all written statutory responsibility? Is there a delegation order for each of them? The Taoiseach might circulate that to see exactly what specific role each of the 19 Ministers of State has.

With respect to Cabinet accountability, I will raise a point from my party's perspective. The role of each and every one of us elected to the House is to hold Ministers to account and question them on certain areas. The responsibility is no less for a Government backbencher than it is for any other Member. As chairman of the Fine Gael Party, I know my colleagues and I feel that dividing speaking slots evenly between political groupings of different sizes leads to a disproportionate impact on Government backbenchers. This is manifested in debates on Private Members' Bills, for example, where it is required that a Minister must open and close the debate on behalf of the Government. The time available for Deputies in my party to raise points in such debates is next to none.

As an example, there was a Private Members' debate not that long go regarding community employment supervisors. I had constructive points I wanted to make about their pension entitlements but I could not get speaking time here. I had to seek a meeting with the Ministers, Deputies Paschal Donohoe and Regina Doherty, afterwards to make those points. I feel a bit aggrieved that my constructive points or questions to the Minister could not happen here and go on the record. It is not ideal and my mandate is the same as that of everybody else. The nub of this is the equal splitting of time between political groupings of different sizes. It can perhaps give a disproportionate voice to those in the Opposition benches.

The Deputy is part of the Government.

A solution would be to treat the Fine Gael grouping differently from Ministers. A Minister, as the holder of an office, has a role and responsibility to hold the view of his or her Department. Ministers do not necessarily represent the view of their political party or constituents. I feel strongly that it is a challenge for us on this side of the House.

The Deputy should speak with his Whip.

I do not know how many Government backbenchers there are.

I am not sure there are any.

My point is-----

I understand the point. An equal point is that is a very small group.

There are 23. That is not small.

They chair committees.

In addition to the questions raised by colleagues I ask about the programme for Government commitment that as part of the next wave of local government reform, the Minister, having consulted widely with all relevant stakeholders, will prepare a report for the Government and the Oireachtas by mid-2017 on potential measures to boost local government leadership and accountability. That report has not been published, despite being promised a year ago.

We have it here. It has not yet been published, admittedly.

The Taoiseach has it.

He does not have it yet. I have it.

Bingo. The Minister of State has it.

May I see it?

When will the rest of us have it? I very much doubt the Minister of State will hand it to me across the Chamber. When will it be made available to Members of the Oireachtas and the public?

The programme for Government indicates that this Government should be judged on the basis of how it addresses the housing crisis. I wonder how accountability for that commitment is being pursued, given the ever-worsening housing and homelessness crisis and record numbers who are homeless. There has been a pretty pathetic output of public housing.

I ask particularly about two of the big ideas from the Government in dealing with housing: Housing Building Finance Ireland, HBFI, and the Local Infrastructure Housing Activation Fund, LIHAF. We were told when LIHAF was introduced that 40% of any development with such funding would deliver affordable housing. That was then dropped with no explanation. Now, essentially no percentage is guaranteed for money that was supposed to deliver affordable housing. It is a similar problem with HBFI, which is a major fund for lending to private developers but absolutely no commitment, guarantee or obligation on the part of those who get those funds to deliver housing that is affordable. What is the point in these initiatives if they deliver large sums to private developers but with no guarantee whatsoever that they will deliver housing that will help address the housing crisis and meet the Government's commitment to address that crisis?

There are only three minutes remaining in the slot so I ask Deputy Burton to be brief.

There are 15 Cabinet members and there are 19 Ministers of State, only a small proportion of whom are women. The former Tánaiste, the Taoiseach's colleague, Deputy Frances Fitzgerald, recently called for 50% of future Governments to comprise women, whether at Cabinet or Minister of State level.

I have given that viewpoint as well. When I was Tánaiste, it was 50:50 or 45:55 with Labour Party women and men in terms of our appointment mix, including the Attorney General. That is the highest level of equality that has ever been achieved by a party represented in Government.

As a newish leader, does the Taoiseach have a commitment to an equality Government that will, as far as possible, be made up of equal numbers of women and men from whatever party or parties command the Government?

I am not into the practice of keeping scorecards on ministerial accountability but I certainly keep close note of whether Ministers are achieving the objectives set for them in the programme for Government and in bilateral meetings. I am happy with the work of my Ministers but of course there are always issues of concern. Where there is concern, it is shared concern and my job as Taoiseach is to work with Ministers and assist them in meeting their objectives.

We should never forget where we are coming from with housing. We had seven years during which virtually no public housing was built because the Government was broke. We had seven years during which the private sector built few houses because the banks were bust and the construction industry was on the floor. We should not forget where we were in 2011. House prices were plummeting and many people were distressed because of that. Many were stuck in negative equity and paying mortgages on houses that were worth far less than they paid for them. There were ghost estates all over the country, homes infested with pyrite and tens of thousands of construction workers on the dole. I appreciate that the Leader of the Opposition apologised for that but the people are still suffering from the consequences of the housing, construction and credit bubbles and what they caused.

We are now seeing some progress. For the past two quarters, rents have increased by 1% or less than 1%. Having increased dramatically, they are now levelling off and that is encouraging. We have seen rough sleeping fall by 40% on the most recent count. Central Statistics Office figures show us that 14,446 new homes were built last year. That was a 50% increase on the year before and a 75% increase on the year before that. Of course that does not include 1,000 unfinished houses that were finished and nearly 2,500 that were reconnected. Student homes are being built too. We are finally starting to see an uptick in construction. Some 7,000 houses were added to the social housing stock last year through various mechanisms. However, we are catching up on a period of seven years when almost no new homes were built, so we have a way to go yet.

The Deputy asked me if I am happy. No, I am not happy and I will not be happy until the numbers of people in emergency accommodation are falling. I will not be happy until home ownership is increasing. I believe in home ownership. I know it is not possible for everyone to own their own home but I want as many people as possible to own their own homes. It distresses me greatly that people who are now buying their first homes are, on average, in their early to mid-30s, whereas it was the case for a long time that people in their mid-20s or late-20s would buy their first homes. We need that to change. We need to get back to the situation where home ownership in Ireland is rising again. That is very much an objective of mine and of Government. We will focus on this issue in the same way as the previous Government focused on solving the employment crisis. We want to apply the same effort and commitment to resolving the housing crisis.

The legislation on Housing Building Finance Ireland is now before the House. LIHAF has made two funding rounds, if not three. The objective of LIHAF is to provide infrastructure to sites so that they can be developed for housing with a proportion of those being affordable housing. I am not sure of the answer to Deputy Boyd Barrett's question but I will check up on it. Obviously, it is public money and if public money is being used to provide access to sites, then a decent proportion of the homes built on those sites, where practicable, should be affordable housing. The same principle should apply with Housing Building Finance Ireland. It is important to bear in mind when it comes to HBFI that the finance is not a grant. It is a loan and the developers will have to pay the money back in full with interest. This is something that the taxpayer or Exchequer will benefit from. It is very different from LIHAF, which is an Exchequer grant to local authorities to access sites. It is important not to confuse the two. I know no one in this House has but people in other places have.

The issue of unpaid private parliamentary secretaries has not been pursued. I do not propose to create any unpaid private parliamentary secretaries, or paid ones for that matter, during the period of this Government. However, it is something that could be considered for the future. I am aware that there is an unfair division of labour among Departments, Ministers and Ministers of State. It is evident that the Departments of Justice and Equality, Health and Housing, Planning and Local Government are required to be in the House far more often whether because of legislation, private members' business or committee work. There is a case to have private parliamentary secretaries in those busy Departments if they need to be represented in the Chamber all the time. The Judicial Appointments Commission Bill has been debated for 72 hours so far in this Chamber and the other Chamber. That is a vast amount of time for the Minister for Justice and Equality and the sole Minister of State at the Department to be in the Chambers. There is a case for the posts in the Departments with a busy parliamentary load but it is not something that I am pursuing during the period of this Government.

We are way over time now, Taoiseach.

Am I over time?

It is not the Taoiseach. The whole lot of us are over time, I am afraid. That is something we need to consider.

I am only on the first page.

Either we take time from the other questions to allow the Taoiseach to give us his comprehensive answer or we can take it from elsewhere.

We should allow the Taoiseach another minute because he was asked two further questions.

I am happy to continue but it is in the hands of the Members.

It is fair that he answers the questions that were asked.

I was asked about the Working Group of Committee Chairmen. I have met that group once in the past year, not twice, but I would be happy to meet them again.

All Ministers of State have assigned responsibilities. They do not all have a delegation order, however, as delegation orders only apply if statutory functions are being transferred to Ministers and Minister of State. That would be the case for approximately half of them.

I fully acknowledge that there are not enough women in ministerial roles in this Government. However, only 12 female Deputies support the Government. Of those 12, seven are Ministers, so more than half the female Deputies who support the Government are in ministerial roles. Clearly that demonstrates the problem. We do not have enough female Deputies. With my Fine Gael leader hat on, I am trying to ensure that we have as many new female Deputies elected to the Dáil as soon as possible. Fine Gael has more female Deputies than any other party. I want us to have far more than any other party after the next election, whenever it comes. In recent days we have selected or added a number of female candidates and there are more to come. We are going to put a major effort behind getting them elected to increase the pool of female Deputies so that many more can hold international office.

I note that Deputy Burton was a party leader herself and was in a position to appoint six Ministers to Cabinet, but only appointed one other woman aside from herself. I am sorry that opportunity was not used.

The Attorney General was also a full member of the Government. There were three and six appointed.

She was not a Minister though. I am sorry the opportunity was not taken when Deputy Burton-----

There were three-----

Can we let the Taoiseach answer, Deputy?

No, he needs to get his facts right.

I think the super-junior is not being counted either. Aside from Deputy Burton herself, the only other full Minister who was appointed to Cabinet was Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, if I remember correctly. The opportunity was lost on that occasion for gender parity, but I anticipate the opportunity will arise in the future for others; I hope it does anyway.

I strongly agree with what Deputy Heydon had to say. We need greater proportionality of speaking time among political parties.

The Government Chief Whip does nothing about it at the Business Committee.

Every Deputy's mandate is equal, whether he or she is elected by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour Party, Sinn Féin or any other party. I believe the larger parties are discriminated against in terms of speaking time. As Deputy Heydon has pointed out, there are as many Fine Gael backbenchers as there are Sinn Féin Deputies, so surely Fine Gael backbenchers should have the same amount of time as Sinn Féin. However, that is not the case at the moment. That is an inequality and it is unfair not only to those Deputies but, more important, to their constituents who elect them.

I was asked about the local authority leadership, governance and administration reform report. The report is with the Minister but he has not shown it to me yet. It is intended to go to Government next week.

For the purpose of clarity, the Sub-Committee on Dáil Reform has done everything that it can possibly do - I thought it was to the satisfaction of all parties - to ensure that proportionality was applied wherever it could be in the allocation of speaking time.

Anyone who is concerned proportionality is not being applied in a specific area should bring the matter to our attention and we will revisit it.

Top
Share