Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 25 Jun 2003

Vol. 569 No. 4

Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Bill 2002: Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 53:
In page 9, to delete line 21 and substitute the following
"(c) a member of the staff of the Commission elected by such staff;”.
–(Deputy Burton).

I understand that amendments Nos. 53 and 56 are being discussed together. The Bill stipulates who will be the members of this commission, namely, the Ceann Comhairle, the Cathaoirleach, an appointee of the Minister for Finance who must be a Member of either House, four Members of the Dáil, three Members of the Seanad and the Secretary General. These amendments propose that, in addition to those 11 members, there should also be two members of the staff of these Houses. They propose an opportunity of voting for two staff members to the commission.

In this day and age, it is ridiculous to set up a body such as this, which will ignore the staff of the Houses. We have 226 elected representatives between the Seanad and the Dáil and 800 to 900 members of staff. Their fate in terms of salaries, terms of employment and working conditions will be determined by the commission. However, this Government does not see fit to give them a say in the running of the Houses by allowing them to elect members to this commission. This is regrettable.

I have been in Leinster House for 14 years. In those 14 years, I have never encountered anything but courtesy from the staff of these Houses. Wherever one goes, from the front gates, where one meets the ushers, to the general office, from one's office to the restaurant and the bar, one meets helpful, courteous and dignified people. I have yet to meet someone who is not worthy of working here or who does not do a good job. It is negligent of this Government to turn its back on those staff members.

I cannot understand how the Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, will not concede to staff members being on the commission. I hope when he replies that he will outline some logical reasons why those people are excluded. Is the Minister of State afraid to have staff members on the commission? Is he afraid they might have some say in the running of these Houses? They would bring much to the commission in their involvement in the running of these Houses. The Minister of State, unfortunately, is presiding over a situation that will exclude them. In recent decades, we have had a system of State boards on which there are worker-directors. However, in the Parliament, we are setting up a commission and ignore any possible input from the staff. There is no logical reason for this. It amazes me that we can preside over this exclusion.

Ministers may wonder how we will proceed with this issue. I assure them I will call for a vote on this amendment. The Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrat Members can then pass through the lobbies and state that they do not want staff members on this commission. That is the question that will be put to them. Then they can go out of this Chamber and see the people on whom they have turned their backs who will feel they are not worthy of becoming partners in the running of the Houses. By becoming partners, the staff will become the guardians of democracy in this State.

What is the logic of such exclusion? I do not want a highfalutin response from the Minister of State. I want clear, straight facts why this Government does not want staff members on this commission. We must hear a full and logical explanation and must set it out clearly to staff why the Government is turning its back on them.

We have excellent, courteous staff members who do their jobs extremely well and of whom we can be proud. When we bring visitors to the Houses – not just from the State, but from all over the world – the staff treat them in a manner befitting this House. However, the Minister of State and the Government do not see fit to allow the staff the courtesy of having a say in the running of the Houses. It is regrettable and I will press this amendment to a vote.

I will be happy to support amendments Nos. 53 and 56 as the acceptance of either would establish the principle of worker representation on the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission.

I wish to record my great disappointment that I received a letter from the Ceann Comhairle advising that my three amendments Nos. 55, 62 and 63 were deemed inadmissible as a result of an assessment that they may involve a potential charge on the Revenue. This is very strange because I tabled these amendments on Committee Stage and there was no question that they would involve an additional charge on the Revenue. It is apparent from the reading of the Ceann Comhairle's letter and the advisers involved that one or other of the Minister of State's amendments on Committee Stage opened the door for a potential payment in lieu of services on this commission, or at least this is what I am advised. I am surprised by that. Surely the addition of two further places on the commission to accommodate two worker representatives would hardly represent a serious challenge to the Exchequer. However, I must accept the ruling and I share the information with colleagues. It is most regrettable.

Deputies Paul McGrath and Burton and I have articulated on Committee and Report Stages the case for worker representation. It is one of the key elements within the amendments tabled on both Stages. I echo the words already spoken. The Minister of State must explain why he believes there should not be representation for some 500 other people who serve the daily workings of the Houses of the Oireachtas, from secretarial assistants to people serving at porter and usher grades to all the other services within the confines of this campus. I find the position adopted by the Minister of State incredulous in this day and age. There are real and valid reasons that representatives of employees of the Houses of the Oireachtas should have active participation in the commission, not least of which relates to their aspirations for advancement in their respective areas of employment.

I hold both the Superintendent and the Captain of the Guard in the highest esteem and there are no two more gentlemanly figures in the service of this institution. However, I understand that both are appointees of the Taoiseach and no one who works in the lower grades within their respective areas of responsibility in the Houses can aspire to their positions through natural promotion. This is something that should be examined and explored, with no disrespect to the current occupants of these positions.

These are real areas that must be addressed by the commission and, in all justice, it is this body that should address them. Worker representation is the only way to ensure we have the full understanding of whatever deficiencies, disappointments and failures the Houses present to those who give their daily effort here. It is not only the labours of elected Deputies and Senators that are appreciated but those of all who make the Houses of the Oireachtas work. It is only in coming together that we can ensure the necessary improvements that will deliver both a Dáil and Seanad that will serve the people better.

Representatives of workers at varying grades have repeatedly made their case. As I said on Committee Stage, trade union representatives in the Houses of the Oireachtas have presented their case to the partnership committee, arguing strenuously for worker representation. It is incumbent on each of us to accede to this valid request. I put it to the Minister that it is our duty and responsibility at this juncture, in turning a new page in the history of the Houses of the Oireachtas, to ensure that we get off on the right foot and that we see real reform and real partnership between Deputies and Senators, parliamentary secretaries and assistants and all other grades of employees within this campus working together to ensure a better Parliament in service of the electorate who have sent us here.

I appeal to the Minister of State to accept the arguments presented by the Opposition Deputies and the members of the Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service in this regard. I fully support Deputy Paul McGrath's position, which I expect will be echoed by Deputy Burton. This is an issue on which we will certainly challenge the Minister of State and his colleagues in Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats by calling a vote.

I appeal to the Minister of State to accept the amendment. As previous speakers said, there is no doubt that we have excellent staff in the Houses. Regardless of what Member of whatever political party with whom staff members must deal, they do an excellent job. When the Minister of State wore a different hat, I remember the Houses being taken over by certain organisations. Despite this, the staff of the Houses did an excellent job and I never saw them rattled or upset.

If there is to be reform and change in the Houses, we must bring the staff along with us, and there is no better way to do this than to have a representative or representatives on the commission. We will see their point of view and they ours. It is important for the workings and running of the Houses that staff are represented. We are fortunate to have such excellent staff. One can telephone them when the Dáil is in session or in recess. If one requires certain information or to send people to the House on one's behalf, staff members go out of their way to do the job. They should be represented on this commission.

As Deputy Paul McGrath and other Members said, we will shortly test Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrat Members to see if they will allow the Government to prevent the staff of the Houses being represented on this commission. I know Fianna Fáil Members were very quiet about the dual mandate and many regret now that they did not have the courage to vote against it when they had the chance and wish they had a second opportunity to do so. They will shortly have an opportunity to ensure the right thing is done in respect of this Bill, namely—

The Deputy was a lone voice in the wilderness.

That is what the Minister of State thinks. He came in with the rising star but he may also go out with it and go back to the IFA instead of the Dáil.

Wishful thinking.

We did not all have the high profile the Minister of State had coming into the House and we were not cherry-picked. When the farmers needed the Minister of State, he saw the view on the other side of the fence. If he wants to discuss that, we will start on it now.

However, that is not the substance of the amendment being discussed which relates to worker representation on the commission. I compliment the staff of the Houses for the excellent job they have done. It would be wrong if the commission were established and they did not have the representation they deserve. They deserve it and the Government knows that. The Minister should do the right thing. On the last occasion he accepted some of our amendments, even though it caused him a few problems, and I compliment him for that, but he should do it again now. We are lucky to have the staff who work in these Houses and they should be represented. The Minister of State could avoid the vote in a few minutes' time by saying the Government will accept representation of the staff of the Houses and he would be rewarding them for the wonderful job they have done over the years.

I agree wholeheartedly with Opposition Deputies about the excellence and courtesy of the staff. We are of one voice on that issue.

The Minister of State should show his appreciation for them then and not be a hypocrite.

As I said on Committee Stage, the Minister is firmly of the view that such an arrangement would be inappropriate for a commission created to enhance the role of parliamentarians.

Deputy Parlon is the Minister.

I am speaking on behalf of the Minister for Finance and we are of one opinion on this.

I thought the Minister of State was passing the buck.

Absolutely not. This commission is being established to allow parliamentarians to run their own business and that is what it is designed to do. The central task is to provide administrative support to the Houses to which they belong and to them as public servants – it is to allow us to run our own show. I appreciate that many of the people who work in Leinster House would be paid by the commission but they are employees of Members or parties.

There are many other staff.

Yes, but a major share of them work for individual Deputies or for parties.

Not even 50% of them do that.

A very substantial share of them do and I would have a lot more credence in Deputy McGrath's position if his party adopted that outlook. Fine Gael does not allow its own highly qualified staff to be members of its parliamentary party.

The Minister of State is wrong, the staff attend parliamentary party meetings.

They have to make up the numbers.

The same goes for any other party, including my own.

Sinn Féin party assistants are full and participatory members of our parliamentary party.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Please allow the Minister of State to make his contribution.

Those represented under the classic worker-director situation would be Civil Service staff in Leinster House. It is not normal for Civil Service offices to have worker-directors or any similar arrangement where their institution is a Department headed by a Minister. There cannot be such a situation where a Minister is head of a Department.

The fundamental thrust of the Bill is to put the commission in relation to the Offices of the Houses of the Oireachtas in the same position as a Minister in his Department. It is reasonable that the commission's workers would have the same representative and participatory facilities available to them as their colleagues who work in Departments. There are partnership committees, conciliation and arbitration for all staff and management advisory committees for senior staff. Below commission level a deepening of those fora could facilitate staff participation but for the reasons I have outlined I cannot accept the amendment.

Live horse, get grass.

I am disappointed with the Minister of State's response. The purpose of this Bill is to allow for the self-governance of the Houses and in any modern democracy that must include the participation of the staff. The Labour Party's amendment is carefully worded to ask the Clerk of the Dáil not to be a voting member of the commission because, as the Minister said, he is analogous to a departmental Secretary General and will be Secretary General of the new commission. We want the funding available to the commission to go into resourcing the Opposition and backbench Members of all parties to allow them to do their job as parliamentarians holding the Government to account. To do that we should have on the commission of the governance of this House the insight and experience of the staff of the House, many of whom have been and will be here far longer than us.

I am extremely disappointed with the Minister of State. The arguments he put forward do not stand up. He is relying on precedent but this is new legislation and he can create the precedent. If the will exists, it can be done but, obviously, the will does not exist and the Minister of State is shunning the staff of the Houses.

I join my colleagues in expressing real disappointment at the Minister of State's response. He showed signs of not wanting to take responsibility for this in referring to the Minister, but he is the Minister with responsibility and he must take at least equal responsibility for this decision. It is not enough to compliment the staff within the Houses and then say that we will not accord them the opportunity of full participation in the new commission.

As I indicated earlier, our parliamentary assistants are full participatory members who have equal status with the elected Members of this House in our parliamentary group and that has been an enriching and broadening experience for each of us. I commend the idea to the Minister of State and all parties here. They are missing access to a wealth of information and experience and are ignoring a reserve of great value. The Minister of State is making a fundamental mistake.

It would be unreasonable to ask the Government to agree to put civil servants on the commission in a superior position to their colleagues relative to other Departments.

The Minister of State is doing that anyway.

We are not doing that, we are not putting them on it in the first place.

There are reserved positions for them.

I have the greatest confidence in Members of this House and the Seanad appoint ing commission members. The Cathaoirleach and Ceann Comhairle are independent. The Captain of the Guard is a man of tremendous expertise in terms of security and he is appointed by the Taoiseach.

The Minister of State is turning his back on him.

As regards the other seven members, I am confident that this House will appoint people who will be up to the job, will make the right decisions and will use their expertise to run the House in a more efficient manner than previously. That is the purpose of the commission. I cannot accept the amendment.

Question put: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand."

Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, Barry.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Cassidy, Donie.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Dempsey, Tony.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fleming, Seán.Fox, Mildred.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Lenihan, Brian.

Lenihan, Conor.McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Nolan, M. J.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donoghue, John.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Boyle, Dan.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Costello, Joe.Crawford, Seymour.Deasy, John.Enright, Olwyn.Ferris, Martin.Gilmore, Eamon.Hayes, Tom.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Hogan, Phil.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.McCormack, Padraic.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Finian.McGrath, Paul.

McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Olivia.Morgan, Arthur.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.Penrose, Willie.Perry, John.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Stagg, EmmetStanton, David.Twomey, Liam.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Kehoe and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will the Minister of State confirm that he is accepting amendments Nos. 64, 73 and 74?

I confirm I accept the amendments.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

As it is now 10.30 p.m. I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That amendments Nos. 64, 73 and 74 and the amendments set down by the Minister for Finance and not disposed of are hereby made to the Bill, Fourth Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed."

Question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn