Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am open to further consideration of the issues Deputy Daly has raised on the matter of the categories of members of the commission. In section 15 of the Bill, which deals with the selection categories, there is specific reference in subsection (7) to the categories of people having experience in human rights, equality or issues concerning diversity among members of society; commerce, finance or administration, including public administration; board membership and corporate governance; and professional dispute resolution or mediation activities.

We will undertake to give the matter further consideration but I do not want to form the view that we are immediately or implacably opposed to the points raised. I do not want to act in any way that might be exclusive of certain or other organisations.

This brings me to Deputy Wallace's amendment No. 69, to section 15, which requires PAS, when recommending persons for appointment as lay people on the commission, to have regard to matters of gender equality and population diversity. I agree with Deputy Wallace that some consideration needs to be given in this regard. I am anxious to look at other legislation. For example, the Act providing for the setting up the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has a specific reference to gender equality. Let us look at that legislation to see if we can agree something for Report Stage. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014 states:

In making recommendations for appointment of persons to the Commission under this section, the Service, and the Government shall have regard to the need to ensure that the members of the Commission broadly reflect the nature of Irish society and that such persons possess knowledge of, or experience in... matters connected with human rights...

If we agree to look at a similar provision for Report Stage, which I believe would meet the import of Deputy Wallace's amendment, it would also address many of the issues referred to by Deputy Daly in this group of amendments and later on in the Bill. If Members consider that the 15 year bar is unduly restrictive or draconian, we could look at it also.

With regard to amendment No. 4 in the names of Deputies Jim O' Callaghan and Jack Chambers, it is very difficult to sustain publicly a popular view as to how a former judge who has practiced as a judge in the courts for many decades could be regarded as a non-legal person consequent to their retirement or leaving the Bench. I believe there is a challenge around how they could be immediately described as a lay person.

It is equally difficult to sustain a position that a person who is not currently a practising barrister or solicitor but who was recently engaged full-time in either of those professions could suddenly be regarded as a non-legal person and therefore regarded as a lay person. There is a difficulty there and we need to meet it in a way that ensures public confidence in what we are doing.