Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

I, too, accept the thrust of the Minister of State's argument regarding amendment No. 14. The renegotiation and restructuring of the Civil Service-wide code of practice provides a good opportunity to explain the position with regard to civil servants who have been suspended or temporarily removed from the payroll. Are they subject to the same conditions as those who leave or retire from the Civil Service through a formal process in terms of acquiring other types of remuneration or employment? I have in mind a specific case arising from the Moriarty tribunal and reported in the media yesterday of a senior civil servant who, following retirement, worked for a person about whose tax affairs he had previously made a favourable decision. What will be the position of a person who has been removed from the payroll, forced to leave or temporarily suspended from the Civil Service as regards working with persons on whose affairs he or she has made or will make decisions in the course of his or her normal employment? The Bill is unclear in this regard.

The current code provides that two years must elapse before a civil servant who leaves a senior position may take up a position in the private sector. We are entering a new phase in that we are legislating for temporary absence and cases involving people who have been dismissed rather than retired from their positions. In any case, the two year period between leaving the Civil Service and taking on a new position is much too short and should probably be extended to five years. Will the Minister of State indicate the Government's position in this regard? Does the legislation address the issue?

I am uncertain as to the reasons the Minister of State believes amendments Nos. 16 and 16a compromise his proposal, given that both amendments appear to strengthen his position by reaffirming the need for independent arbitration when decisions are taken. As Deputy Bruton indicated, it is possible that he has been unable to identify the internal process available to those who have been removed from the payroll. An internal mechanism is not, however, the type of process required by natural justice. Independent third party arbitration is needed for decisions of this nature. Will the Minister of State provide greater clarity as to the internal mechanisms which exist and whether they can be considered independent?

See this speech in context