Vol. 405 No. 6
2 Mr. Bell asked the Taoiseach (1) the date of appointment and term of office of each member of the National Economic and Social Council, (2) the number and name of each appointed civil servant and (3) whether a change in the manner of nomination of persons to that body is warranted, having regard to the fact that the unemployed sector is not, as such, represented.
The dates of first appointment of all members of the National Economic and Social Council are set out in a schedule which I propose to have circulated in the Official Report. The term of office of members will expire on 16 November 1994. There are four civil servants on the council as indicated in the schedule.
I do not see any need to change the manner of nomination of persons to the council which has been agreed with the social partners. I am satisfied that the existing membership of the council, particularly the membership by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, adequately represents the interests of unemployed persons. The concerns of the existing membership about unemployment are clearly reflected in the various reports of the council.
National Economic and Social Council Current Council Members — February 1991
Date of Appointment
|
Chairman: |
|
|
Mr. Padraig Ó hUiginn |
— 1984 (civil servant) |
|
Nominated by the Government: |
|
|
Mr. Michael N. Conlon |
— 1989 |
|
Dr. Miriam Hederman O'Brien |
— 1984 |
|
Mr. Colm McCarthy |
— 1989 |
|
Dr. Joyce O'Connor |
— 1989 |
|
Mr. Conor McCarthy |
— 1989 |
|
Mr. Michael Webb |
— 1983 |
|
Mr. Seán Cromien |
— 1987 (civil servant) |
|
Mr. Kevin Bonner |
— 1990 (civil servant) |
|
Mr. John Donlon |
— 1989 (civil servant) |
|
Nominated by the Confederation of Irish Industry: |
|
|
Mr. Patrick J. Wright |
— 1990 |
|
Mr. Liam Connellan |
— 1973 |
|
Nominated by the Construction Industry Federation: |
|
|
Mr. George Hennessy |
— 1989 |
|
Nominated by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions: |
|
|
Mr. Philip Flynn |
— 1989 |
|
Mr. Dan Murphy |
— 1973 |
|
Mr. Peter Cassells |
— 1982 |
|
Mr. Kieran Mulvey |
— 1989 |
|
Ms. Patricia O'Donovan |
— 1989 |
|
Nominated by the Irish Co-Operative Organisation Society: |
|
|
Mr. G. Tierney |
— 1989 |
|
Nominated by the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association: |
|
|
Mr. Donal Hynes |
— 1984 |
|
Mr. Ciaran Dolan |
— 1977 |
|
Nominated by the Federation of Irish Employers: |
|
|
Mr. Thomas Toner |
— 1984 |
|
Mr. John Dunne |
— 1989 |
|
Nominated by the Irish Farmers' Association: |
|
|
Mr. Alan Gillis |
— 1990 |
|
Mr. Michael Berkery |
— 1984 |
Have bodies such as ICTU and the FII the right of nomination or merely to recommend nominations? Who, effectively, makes a decision in relation to the final appointment?
ICTU have the right to nominate five representatives.
3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he has received representations from the National Youth Council in respect of a statement made by him to Dáil Éireann on 30 January 1991 relating to the attendance of the council's representatives at meetings of the National Economic and Social Council; and if he will outline his response to these representations.
On 14 February 1991, I received a letter from the Director of the National Youth Council about the matter referred to in the question. I subsequently received a letter dated 18 February from the Deputy on the matter.
In the correspondence referred to it was stated that the National Youth Council had two representatives at 35 of 50 meetings of the National Economic and Social Council in the period 7 September 1984 to 21 July 1989.
The attendance records, however, show that there were 57 meetings of the National Economic and Social Council during the period in question and joint attendance of the National Youth Council representatives occurred on only 24 occasions. In fact, in the period from March 1987 to July 1989, the period with which as Taoiseach I am most familiar, joint attendance by the NYCI representatives occurred in only three out of 24 occasions and the council were unrepresented at four meetings.
I would emphasise, however, that it was not on the basis of non-attendance that the NYCI's representation was reduced to one in October 1989, when the membership of the NESC was reconstituted. As I have said in the House in the past, the Government had only six places to allocate to independent members and we wanted to assemble as broad a cross-section of community representation as possible. The Government and social partners consider that one representative from the NYCI is adequate, particularly as a representative can always send an alternate to a meeting. Other equally important representative bodies such as the ICOS and the CIF have only one representative.
Is it the case that on 30 January the Taoiseach stated in the House that he did not believe the two representatives from the NYCI ever attended together?
I did not say that.
The Official Report will show that is what he said. Will the Taoiseach further indicate that he has now admitted the NYCI representatives did attend together on 24 occasions? Will he, therefore, have the grace to admit that the statement he made on 30 January in this matter was incorrect and withdraw it as it represents and is seen by the National Youth Council of Ireland as a slur on them?
This is very much a red herring. What I conveyed to the Dáil on a number of occassions when we discussed this matter was that I could not give the National Youth Council more than one representative because the Government had only six places to allocate and of those there were so many important bodies of one kind or another to represent that it seemed to me perfectly adequate for the National Youth Council to have one of those six places. That was the main thrust of my argument. I went on to say, and it was only by way of comment, that I did not think the National Youth Council would be deprived in any significant way because as a general rule only one representative had attended and it appeared that was adequate from their point of view. Therefore, it is not really a relevant argument. The real difficulty is that when the Government have only six places there is a careful balance preserved overall in NESC and it was not possible to give more than one seat to the National Youth Council.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the entire purpose of these representations was to elicit an admission from him that he made a misleading and damaging statement about a well respected voluntary organisation? Will the Taoiseach agree that the purpose of these representations was not to argue whether they should have two seats or one but simply to get him to retract a misleading and damaging statement he made about an organisation, indicating he did not believe the two ever attended together at a meeting?
I did not say that.
I can quote——
Deputy Bruton——
——directly from the record which shows that the Taoiseach did say that.
Deputy Bruton will know full well that quotations at Question Time are not in order.
I said I could quote. I am not allowed to do so, but I can quote, Sir, to show that the Taoiseach did say he believed the two never attended together. He has now admitted they did attend together on 24 occasions but he has not the grace to admit he made a misleading and damaging statement about a voluntary organisation——
We are having repetition. Deputy Bruton, there is no need to indulge in repetition of this kind.
Will the Taoiseach indicate some measure of apology to the National Youth Council for remarks he made here in this House which they regard as offensive?
I do not think anybody in this country takes this matter seriously, least of all the National Youth Council.
They do indeed.
I never intended any insult or anything derogatory about the National Youth Council for whom I have the highest respect. I actually appointed members of the National Youth Council to important bodies in this country. The Deputy is making a massive mountain out of a minor molehill. There is nothing in the point he is making. I was at pains here time and again in this House to explain to other Deputies who raised it that the reality was it was no reflection on the National Youth Council whatsoever, it was simply a matter of giving them one representative because that was all I could afford.
Is the Taoiseach not aware that the National Youth Council——
We must bring this matter to a close.
——in a letter I have in my possession say they regard the Taoiseach's remarks as a slur and it is showing the NYCI in a bad light? The Taoiseach is simply misleading the House.
This issue will not be debated now. Question No. 4, please.
The Taoiseach is simply misleading the House when he says the National Youth Council do not take this matter seriously. They do take it seriously and the Taoiseach has been most ungracious in failing to withdraw an inaccuracy.
