Peter Burke (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The cathaoirleach has raised an important point. Amendment No. 130 proposes to require that six particular persons representing very specific, but important, interests in the maritime area be appointed to the board of the MARA. On Second Stage, we were accused of creating a board that is not balanced. We are seeking to address this in amendment No. 129. In my view, this proposal would result in a similar imbalance. That is not to say that the particular experts listed will not be important in the proper functioning of MARA; they will, but there are other ways to ensure that the relevant expertise is deployed in the correct manner within the organisation. We must make a distinction between day-to-day operations and board oversight.

First, through my own amendment, such persons can already be appointed to the board. However, we must be mindful of what the board of a State agency needs to do as set out in section 45 and a suitable balance of people needs to be appointed to it.

Second, in section 51, I have made provision for the board to establish specialist committees to provide it with the appropriate advice in areas including, but not limited to, those set out in this amendment. This, I am sure the members will agree, will provide a useful tool in the proper functioning of the organisation as a whole and will allow MARA to engage with the sectoral specialists set out in the amendment.

Third, MARA will, of course, be required to either directly employ the relevant specialist expertise to operate various functions set out in section 41 or engage with other public bodies with the relevant expertise to do so under the provisions set out in section 63.

As always, I fully appreciate the intention behind the amendment but it would be contrary to the spirit of my amendment if I were to create a similar imbalance to the board in the manner set out. I must oppose the amendment, but I will offer the members the opportunity, if they so wish, to withdraw it in favour of my amendment No. 129.

Amendment No. 131 requires there to be a representative of the fishing industry, which makes a valuable contribution, on the board. While I appreciate the sentiment, the wording of this text is imprecise and open to challenge. It does not prescribe what part of the industry should be represented on MARA and could be subject to the accusation of excluding other sectors of the industry or, indeed, other industries operating in the maritime area.

There is sufficient scope in amendment No. 129 to facilitate the wish to have representation from this sector on the board. That said, all members of the board must have sufficient expertise and experience relating to MARA functions and corporate governance generally.