Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)

I am not sure that making contracts probationary addresses some of the issues raised in regard to the procedure for the selection of the person involved — which I was seeking to address — or the decision on whether the person should be engaged as a probationary established public servant rather than an employee in some other capacity. It does not deal with the oversight of people during the making of probationary contracts.

My concern relates to the difficulties that were exposed by the appointment of a PR consultant by the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, which led to much public unease. We need to ensure that the various steps in that chain which were subject to public unease are addressed. I do not believe that the Minister of State's amendment achieves this. He seems to be addressing a broader issue concerning contracts in the public service rather than the concern that arose in respect of the apparent lack of a proper process audit — that is the phrase that was used — associated with the way in which the tenders were made and the way in which the contracts were set and whether this was in the public interest or whether, as ought to have been the case, it was done on an arm's-length basis. Those are the areas of concern. I do not believe the Minister of State's amendment deals with them and I am somewhat puzzled by his reply.

See this speech in context