Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister and Deputy O'Callaghan for their Bills. I will be very brief. I just wish to cover a couple of concerns I have, some of which I share with colleagues across all parties and they also touch on some of the observations made by the Minister.

I have a fundamental problem with the idea of a lay majority for a multitude of reasons. On the concept of a level of probity being present within the commission and-or the motivation for the Bills in the first instance, notwithstanding Deputy O'Callaghan's closing remark in questioning the need for either, I have a slight difficulty with the idea of a lay majority on the commission on the basis of qualifying criteria because, to oppose the view expressed by Deputy Daly, in my view the criteria in lists A and B are not restrictive enough. Anybody can be appointed to such a commission but he or she must have a basis for being appointed. One cannot randomly pluck a citizen from the street no more than one would from within the legal profession itself. One would not choose somebody who is unsuited to such a position, one would do one's best to find somebody who is reasonable but qualified.

I suspect that in certain cases, especially in regard to list B, the qualifying criteria need to be bolstered rather than reduced, as Deputy Daly suggested.

I also support the idea of promotion through the commission. I would leave it to constitutional experts to determine the ranking but, as somebody who served as an interviewer on a number of panels over a number of years I can say that panels always rank candidates. What is the point of doing an interview with a view to making a recommendation to employ somebody without ranking them? If the Department took the view that security checking or clearance for an individual outside the remit of the commission or any other person would make it difficult, I would accept that point but that point has not been made. In the case of both Bills a happy medium should be found.

I do not wish to make light of Deputy O'Brien's remark on perception versus reality but every time I hear perception being referenced as a basis on which to make fundamental change I recall comedian Dara Ó Briain talking about the perception of crime in relation to statistics which prove the opposite. I have a difficulty with lay persons determining that there was an undue influence in the political process in the appointment of the Judiciary. I welcome the prohibition of canvassing, which is well overdue. It is bizarre that canvassing can still take place either by candidates themselves, which I cannot prove but I am sure has happened over the decades, or others. I would certainly welcome that change.

We have spent a large amount of time going over the requirement for the Government Bill and it has caused a large amount of distraction in the operation of Government. There has been a perception that it has interfered with the workings of Cabinet, which is quite distressing and disappointing. I am disappointed that this Bill came to us in the manner in which it did and that is no disrespect to Deputy O'Callaghan, who may well have come to the Dáil recently with his intention to put it forward. If he had not, I might have perceived it to be a reaction to the position Deputy Ross took prior to entering Government.

Certain changes can be made to the judicial appointments process to make it more robust, transparent and immune to influence by putting in qualifiers. I do not have a difficulty with the commission being created but I do have a difficulty with the lay majority, for reasons I have outlined. I also have a difficulty with the qualifying criteria. If it is feasible, I would like the committee to be presented with a viewpoint on the constitutional elements that have been questioned, in particular with regard to the ranking mentioned in the opening statement of the Minister. If the Department cannot give its viewpoint on these, perhaps the committee can go off and seek a view itself. It does not necessarily sit well with normal procedures for vetting and the interview process.