Does the section refer to the board as a body corporate or individual members of the board accepting gifts of money, land or property?
SECTION 30.
Question proposed: "That section 30 stand part of the Bill."
It refers to the board as a body corporate.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 31.
Question proposed: "That section 31 stand part of the Bill."
I am confused about section 31. Some boards have this section precluding Members of the Oireachtas etc. serving on them while other boards do not. Why is there a difference? Why are Oireachtas Members unsuitable for some boards yet are suitable for others? The Dún Laoghaire Harbour Bill that was rushed with indecent haste through the House in the past 24 hours — a questionable Bill giving retrospective jurisdiction and setting up an interim harbour board for Dún Laoghaire — allows Oireachtas Members and MEPs on the board. This Bill does not allow Oireachtas Members on the board and neither are Oireachtas Members allowed on the board of the racing authority. What is the dividing line? I have not been able to work out the formula.
That point is worth pursuing. I wonder why Oireachtas Members and MEPs are excluded from boards such as this. There is, perhaps, an underlying view that they cannot be trusted or that they would use the board for political purposes. If that is the thinking I reject it. I will go along with the section because it seems to be the norm that Oireachtas Members cannot be members of many different boards. At one stage — I cannot remember whether in draft or in published legislation — there was a provision that people of unsound mind, lunatics and Oireachtas Members could not be members of the board.
Criminals also. I was one of the victims — not for any criminal activity.
It was one of those categories and leave it up to Members to decide which.
My greatest crime was to be a Member of the Oireachtas. I was removed from the board of the Cork Regional College.
I am sorry the Chairman was included with all those other categories. Unless we stand up for ourselves and our profession nobody else will.
To my knowledge this is current practice with such boards. I do not see this reflecting on public representatives. Perhaps the time available to them may be a factor. Transparency is important where public representatives have representation. There are traditions in some boards where there are nominations from local authorities, for example, and those nominees can be members of the local authority and Members of the Seanad or Dáil or MEPs. The procedure here is current practice but is not meant to reflect on the integrity of public representatives.
My point was that this exclusion does not apply to some boards but does apply to others. What is the logic behind that? Why is it that in legislation that went through the Dáil yesterday setting up an interim Dún Laoghaire Harbour Board Oireachtas Members are deemed fit and trustworthy to serve on it and have enough time to do so, yet they are being ruled out in this legislation?
I am not saying that I disagree with them being ruled out. I agree with Deputy Haughey that it seems to be the acceptable course to take with most boards. Who decides whether they can or cannot be on the board? Is it the parliamentary draftsman or the Minister? Did the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry or the Minister of State make a conscious decision that their Oireachtas colleagues could not be on the board of An Bord Bia? The Minister for the Marine, Deputy Andrews, must have made a conscious decision that Oireachtas Members can be trusted on the Dún Laoghaire Harbour Board. It does not add up; either they are fit to be on any semi-State board or on none?
I take the point. In terms of developing legislation there are elements of conforming with current practice. I do not recall a conscious decision on this matter.
It just found its way in?
It would have come in because it would be current practice in the draftsman's or the Attorney General's office. I have not studied the detail of the other Bill from the Department of the Marine so I cannot answer the Deputy's question.
Perhaps by Report Stage the Minister will be able to indicate why some boards can have Oireachtas Members and others cannot.
I will be happy to do so.
It is interesting because there is a precedent in yesterday's Bill. Perhaps the Minister for the Marine is wrong and this Bill is right. I am not specifically contesting the provision in this Bill because it has been the practice. We do many things in legislation just because they have always been done without asking if it is still the best thing to do or if times have changed. We are often told that something is a precedent or the parliamentary draftsman always does it that way. I would like to think that the politicians run the country and decide on the legislation and not the permanent Government, with respect to the Minister's officials.
Question put and agreed to.