Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I accept the Minister of State's bona fides. I also accept that the procedures in the code are fair. That is why I am at a loss. Since the Minister of State agrees that there should be fair procedure, that regard should be had to representations and that there is a constitutional right to such procedures, why is he so opposed to including this in the statute? He has not given any reason, coherent or otherwise, as to why what he states is the case should not be made explicit in the Bill. Why does he oppose including in the legislation what he asserts has legal effect through a statutory instrument by way of circular from the Minister for Finance? Why should the latter not be placed in the Bill? I have not heard a shred of a coherent reason as to why this is the case.

The Minister of State indicated to the House that he agrees with the principle and with the proposals from this side of the House regarding fair procedures, that he agrees that there is a constitutional right for a civil servant faced with disciplinary proceedings which could — as I indicated in respect of subsection (1) — have serious consequences for him or her and his or her future. Why does he oppose accepting it? In the absence of any reason, coherent or otherwise, that we should not amend the legislation to be explicit in this regard, I must press the matter.

See this speech in context