Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 15 December 2004
1 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach the names of the persons he has appointed to the boards of the State agencies under the aegis of his Department since May 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30937/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra2 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach the persons appointed to boards or agencies under the aegis of his Department during 2004; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32124/04]
Amharc ar fhreagra3 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the appointments he has made to boards of State agencies since May 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32415/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.
I refer the Deputies to the reply which I gave to a similar question on 5 October. I include a table showing the appointments which have been made since then.
|
State Board/Agency |
Name of Appointee |
Occupation/ Organisation |
Date of Appointment |
|
National Economic & Social Forum |
|||
|
Strand (ii) Employer/Trade Unions |
|||
|
Employer/Business Organisations |
Maria Cronin |
IBEC |
Oct/Nov 2004 (replaced Jackie Harrison) |
|
Strand (iii) Community & Voluntary Sector |
|||
|
Disadvantaged |
Audrey Deane |
Society of Saint Vincent de Paul |
Nov 2004 (replaced John-Mark McCafferty) |
|
Strand (iv) Central Government, Local Government and Independents |
|||
|
Local Government |
Councillor Ger Barron |
General Council of County Councils |
Nov 2004 (replaced Cllr. John Egan) |
|
Councillor Jack Crowe |
General Council of County Councils |
Nov 2004 (replaced Cllr. Patsy Treanor) |
|
|
John Tierney |
County and City Managers Association |
Nov 2004 (replaced Donal O’Donoghue) |
The only change since then is to the National Economic and Social Forum. There has been one change at IBEC, one from the voluntary sector where a person from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul has replaced another member and two councillors and one county manager have been changed in the local government sector. There are no other changes.
How many agencies are under the aegis of the Taoiseach's Department? Is he still having difficulty in getting quality people to take up these positions, as he expressed before, because of the odium in which some State boards find themselves?
It does not affect my Department because it is mostly made up of the social partners. The only groups under my aegis are the Information Society Commission, whose members tend to be technical people, the National Statistics Board, whose members are most definitely technical people, the Law Reform Commission, which is very small, and the National Centre for Partnership and Performance and the National Economic and Social Forum. These groups are made up of Members of this House or the social partners, so my Department is not affected. The position is stabilising on general State boards as the era of inquires moveson.
Is the Taoiseach satisfied that the gender balance sought by organisations such as the National Women's Council is not yet reflected in State boards? Only 27% of those appointed to State boards are women, despite a minimum target of 40% set by the Government in 1991. What procedures are in place to redress that imbalance? Will that be established by any timeframe set by the Taoiseach?
The equality division of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform monitors that on a continuous basis. My own Department endeavours to make sure that we have the highest percentage of women. A number of boards under my Department are chaired by women. It is not as big a problem with NESC, where 42% of members are women and around 40% of the other boards are women. That is a good figure, but all the boards are monitored by the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Is the Taoiseach saying that all State boards under his aegis have around 40% female membership? It is also Government policy to promote people with disabilities. What is the Taoiseach's record in this regard in relation to appointments to State boards?
I do not have that information with me. We are ahead of the average and we are trying to improve on it. The average is around 3% and we are around 4%, but we always try to increase that wherever we can and to make facilities for as many as we can.
On the Deputy's first question, in some of our boards we are higher and in others we might be a bit less, but around 40% of our boards comprise women. Our problem is with the social partners. It is an ongoing battle with all of them to get them to nominate women, though it has improved. In the other boards, it is not so much of a problem. We have a good representation on the statistics board and the Law Reform Commission, where there are two women on a board of five or six members. The social partners are improving but we always have to go back to force them to comply. I am not blaming one social partner over another, it seems to happen with all of them.
