Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

We will not deal with that matter at present, although we may have to revisit it at a later date. Even those Ministers who knew nothing about decentralisation on the night before it was announced were ready on the morning after to welcome public servants of all descriptions to their constituencies. I hope the programme goes well.

Will we return to the good old days when the proposals in the Bill are implemented? Once Departments have moved to the country and become embedded, having been duly welcomed, will greater political influence surround the selection process? This would be dangerous. Over the years, we have all come to recognise the importance of ensuring that appointments of this nature must be above reproach in terms of political influence. It would not be in the interests of the public service or the general public if that were to cease to be the case or if procedures were introduced to change the current position.

I wonder if the proposed decentralisation will result in a re-centralisation process in the new location, because it appears to be a possibility. More important, the political influence I believe could be brought to bear on the selection process under these proposals will not be beneficial. The Government parties will argue that they know best and have a mandate from the people. While the latter is true, the former contention is not the case because the people change their minds from time to time.

In a country such as this, with such a small population, it is not uncommon, even under the procedures of the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commission, for members of an interview board to know the interviewees who come before it. The criticism was levelled on occasion, sometimes justifiably, that a person or persons on an interview board were known to a person being interviewed and vice versa. To ensure this no longer occurred, a different process was proposed. Unfortunately, the Bill will strengthen the possibility of this recurring because each Department will have greater influence over the selection of interviewees for internal positions. In those circumstances, the risk of politicisation is significantly increased.

While the precise dangers entailed in these proposals may not have dawned on the Government, in democracies it is inevitable that opposition parties will succeed the governments, even long-standing governments. The danger in this respect is that an incoming Government will decide to give its predecessor a taste of its own medicine by pursuing a similar policy, albeit slightly improved and refined. In such circumstances, it is important to remember that two wrongs do not make a right because the new Government could find itself repeating the mistakes of the past. Nevertheless, the Opposition would have some grounds for arguing the case for doing so.

This legislation has the potential to destroy a good system, that is, the procedure applied by the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commission. The proposed system has the potential to allow the interviewer, that is, the body, Department or agency which requires staff, to strengthen its hand to an unacceptable level in determining who it wants to employ.

Circumstances may also arise in which the unestablished Civil Service falls within the remit of the proposal. A person or persons with friends in a Government or Department or who may have been an unestablished civil servant in the employ of a Department, could find himself or herself being interviewed by a person whom he or she knows. What course of action is envisaged in such circumstances? What would happen in the event that such a person was informed that it would not be a good idea to proceed with an interview because further positions are likely to arise in the Department in question? Given that such a person would have inside knowledge, would he or she be allowed to go before an interview board? I have serious reservations in this regard. In addition, once appointed to the general Civil Service or public service, such a person would be entitled to a certain degree of immunity from being identified as a political appointee, which would not be a good for the public service.

Public servants know that it is not a good idea to politicise the Civil Service or the public service. While such arrangements may be grand and cosy for a certain period and overcome certain obstacles or meet certain requirements, they are not good from the point of view of the general public or services. From my knowledge of the public service over the years, I believe it has worked extremely well. The reason for the establishment of the Civil Service and Local Appointments Commission was to remove political influence from appointments of this nature and it achieved this objective to a reasonable degree.

This is a small country. One would be surprised at the number of people one recognises, particularly as one gets older. The longer one is around, the more faces one recognises. It is not uncommon for people to express surprise at having suddenly encountered on an interview board a person whom they had not seen for years. In the past, strict rules and guidelines were laid down appertaining to such matters. What is likely to happen under the proposed new system? What will happen when a Department is seeking to make new appointments or replace officials who have been promoted?

The Bill will give greater influence to local authorities and Departments and the bodies and agencies accountable to them.

See this speech in context