Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 24 Mar 1987

Vol. 371 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Parliamentary Reform.

1.

asked the Taoiseach if he intends to continue the evolution of parliamentary reform; if he will set out his plans in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

As the Deputy will appreciate, responsibility for parliamentary reform is a matter for the Dáil.

The Government propose to avail of the usual channels to co-operate with all parties in the House in devising procedures for the improvement of our debates and the more effective and efficient dispatch of parliamentary business. We are prepared to enter into discussions at any time with the other parties on these matters.

Do the Government intend to suggest the reappointment of many of the committees which existed in the 24th Dáil and, in particular, do they intend to bring forward a motion at an early date for the reappointment of the Public Accounts Committee? Has any consideration been given to the appointment of a foreign affairs committee of the House?

Yes, it is the intention to enter immediately into discussions with the parties to see how these committees should be reconstituted, in the light of our experience of the way they operated in the last Dáil. The Public Accounts Committee are a statutory committee and must necessarily be reestablished. There is a question down to the Minister for Foreign Affairs regarding the appointment of a foreign affairs committee.

Have the Government any intention of bringing forward proposals to improve procedures for raising urgent matters in the House, for example, a matter which I tried to raise before the general election, which was the possible danger to life and limb from gas leaks in Dublin city? Would the Taoiseach consider proposals to review Standing Orders so that procedures would be introduced to allow urgent matters of that kind to be raised? Secondly, has the Taoiseach any proposals to bring forward regarding the holding of Government State agencies and bodies more accountable to the House for their actions?

I think we would have a mutual interest in ensuring that matters of urgent public importance could be raised here in some appropriate and suitable fashion. As the Deputy knows, it very often happens that not alone does a Deputy wish to raise a matter but that the Minister responsible is very anxious to have it raised so that he can make a statement on the matter. On all sides we would have a common interest in ensuring that we devise some mechanism for doing this. Of course, I am sure the Deputy will agree that the procedure would have to be hedged in with some protection; we cannot have a general free-for-all on every topic every day. Subject to that, I would be quite disposed to discussing with the parties how matters of urgent public concern could be ventilated here.

On the question of the State and semi-State sector and its accountability here, that is a matter for another occasion.

Finally, would the Taoiseach set some time scale for announcing the evolution of the parliamentary reform which the Government have in mind? I recommend that it be done before the Easter recess.

Is it the intention of the Taoiseach to appoint a member of his Cabinet with special responsibility for parliamentary procedure — somebody like the Leader of the House, which was the case in the last Administration?

No. It would be our intention that this matter be dealt with, as previously, by the Chief Whip whose fundamental responsibility it is, after all.

Would that indicate that the Taoiseach does not have the same commitment to parliamentary reform as was obvious from the previous Administration?

No. I have indicated in my reply that I am anxious to be constructive and co-operative on this whole question of enabling us to dispatch our parliamentary business more effectively and more efficiently. It is my personal opinion, reinforced by a long number of years in the House, that responsibility for these matters should be vested in one single parliamentary person. However, if it turns out that we cannot achieve the level of progress necessary through the mechanism of the Whips, then I am prepared to look again into the matter.

Barr
Roinn