Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The Minister is insinuating that we want to get rid of the authority of the PAS but the amendments I have tabled, for example, those that proposed to remove sections 15(7)(e) and 15(7)(f), were drafted to remove any requirement or desire on the part of the PAS for experience in public sector appointments, board membership and corporate governance. These proposals are made with a view to broadening the potential for the PAS to choose from outside of the usual career civil servants or retired civil servants who would be likely to have experience in these areas, thus encouraging as broad and as diverse an approach as possible by the PAS rather than restricting it only to candidates who have such experience. This would also minimise the potential for public sector groupthink within the commission. The commission is unique and would be best served by a diverse membership with a dynamic and innovative approach to decision-making.

From this perspective, the inclusion of lay members with little or no experience of public sector appointments processes or board membership would be preferable. This is also the reasoning behind the amendment of section 15(7)(e) to remove the reference to "public administration" and insert the words "civil society, trade union activity and academia". Again, this would encourage the casting of the net wider to include lay members from these backgrounds, rather than seeking only to appoint lay members with backgrounds in finance, commerce and public administration, as is the case under section 15(7)(e) as currently drafted.

Amendment No. 69 proposes to insert a new subsection (8) to impose a statutory requirement on the PAS, when selecting lay members of the commission, to aim for gender balance and diversity. I am not arguing for one moment that we should abandon the use of the PAS. This proposal provides for an innovative approach to the selection of judges. It is desirable to have diversity in the composition of the commission. No one denies that people from the backgrounds that have been highlighted are more qualified than some of the lay members who should be included for diversity reasons. However, this does not change the fact that it is good to have a wide range of approaches. None of us has a God-given right to believe our approach is always correct. People take different views and all I am asking is that the make-up of the commission be as diverse as possible and reflect society to the greatest possible extent. Regardless of how clever or experienced a person is, all of us are members of society and our objective here is to establish a commission that reflects society. If we do not make the commission diverse, it will reflect only part of society. We are not, as the Minister appeared to insinuate, calling for the PAS to be abandoned.