Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 19 Jun 1996

SECTION 6.

Question proposed: "That section 6 stand part of the Bill."

Mrs. O'Rourke

Section 6 (1) states:

There shall stand established, on such day as the Minister may by order appoint . . . a body to be known as the National Standards Authority of Ireland to carry out the functions assigned to it by this Act.

This section sets up the NSAI. I hold fast to the view I expressed on Second Stage, and nothing I have read or heard since and no one to whom I have spoken has changed my mind, that this is an empire building exercise, not by the Minister but by executives. They have their own patch, as is the case in many agencies for employment creation or generation. It is they who wish to have new powers, to establish new bodies and take onto themselves new titles and premises, for what reason I do not know. This section sets up the agency but I do not see the point of it.

Those who work in the NSAI are being trampled upon by the empire building egos of executives. There has not been enough dialogue with them on this measure. The Minister may say Deputy Seamus Brennan was the person who set this in train; I know that but then, as now, I did not agree with the way this has progressed. It will mean another agency, more fat cats and the diminution of the rights of those currently working within the NSAI.

We have not tabled any amendments to this section so we will vote as a party on this issue later. Whatever we may have said on other occasions about the Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, he is a practical, common sense person — I have found this despite other frissonswhich may obtain between us. I have no doubt that his heart is not in this Bill, because it simply continues the proliferation of agencies, provides more expenses for certain people, and less rights for those who work in this body.

Mr. Rabbitte

As Deputy O'Rourke said, we had this discussion on Second Stage and I thought I set out reasonably forensically the arguments for taking this step. I will not mention what Deputy Seamus Brennan said when he set this in train; he is on a different train at the moment, going to Ballinteer——

Mrs. O'Rourke

Also a blind alley.

Mr. Rabbitte

——and we will leave him on it. Deputy O'Rourke is being harsh. I do not query her general thesis about the tendency of bureaucracies to grow and the tendency of most human beings to want to acquire more power, as it seems to be a deep part of what we are. In this case, however, the arguments I set out on Second Stage resulted from a great deal of consideration being given to this. If I thought the purpose of this Bill was, as Deputy O'Rourke describes it, to set up another quango for reasons of empire building and aggrandisement by a small number of executives, I would not have brought it forward or persisted with it. However, my legal advice about European Commission requirements makes it imperative, as I see it, to set up a separate agency, the quality and standards of whose work is not open to challenge because of any interaction with agencies concerned with an entirely different remit.

The charge about dialogue is unfair. This Bill has gone into Committee a couple of weeks before the House goes into recess because I held up my officials for many months by having direct meetings with the staff concerned and their union representatives. We exchanged submissions and engaged in many detailed arguments. Every time they made a new submission our plans to progress the Bill were delayed, because I insisted that they be researched, rebutted point by point or accepted. I came to the conclusion that the main fear underlying the charges Deputy O'Rourke now makes related to the perennial chestnut of industrial relations problems and the staff's natural wish for security of employment and protection of their existing position. That is why we drafted amendment No. 15, an extensive amendment which deals with those fears and vehement objections. I spent a long time with the staff and a longer time discussing their fears with my officials. Amendment No. 15 goes a long way towards assuaging those fears.

This returns us to a philosophical question, which I do not want to go into. Deputy O'Rourke is making no secret of the fact that she is shaping up for an event in 12 or 18 months, when she will propose that some agencies should no longer exist.

Mrs. O'Rourke

I am not shaping up for that, I am speaking up for sensible thinking.

Mr. Rabbitte

I do not dismiss that as there may be some truth in it. However, the argument for this is based on legal and business imperatives rather than the wish to set up a separate quango.

Chairman

I think the points have been made. I was the longest serving member of the board of the IIRS, having been on it for 14 years, so I am deeply interested in this discussion. However, I would like if we could confine our deliberations to the relevant section.

Mrs. O'Rourke

This is relevant to the section.

Mr. E. O'Keeffe

I am glad the Minister gave us the date of the election.

Chairman

I am anxious that we concentrate on the business before us, not on what may happen in the future. Is section 6 agreed?

Ms Keogh

I am not in full agreement with the objections to setting up this authority but there is a valid point to be made about the staff's fears. Will there be a further opportunity under amendment No. 15 to discuss those fears? I was glad the Minister had tabled an amendment and it deserves closer scrutiny.

Mrs. O'Rourke

We tabled an amendment.

Ms Keogh

I accept that. Although my party has difficulty with the proliferation of agencies, in this instance I have no ideological objection to setting up a separately operating body to set the standards which should obtain.

Question put and agreed to.