Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)

I find this puzzling. In the event of a crisis, if the Clerk of the Dáil was dismissed, which has never happened, it would constitute a grave crisis in the administration of the Dáil. If it was done by the Taoiseach, it would inevitably be seen as a heavily politicised decision by the Government of the day. The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission has been established with some degree of independence to mark the Houses as separate from the Government of the day. As we are setting up this administrative structure to give powers to secretaries general and Ministers in line Departments, it is odd not to use the Office of the Ceann Comhairle in this grave scenario that might lead to the dismissals referred to here.

The Ceann Comhairle is a constitutional officer with particular rights, responsibilities and duties to the Oireachtas. The Ceann Comhairle must act with high levels of impartiality as to how the business of the House is conducted. I cannot imagine a graver crisis than the dismissals envisaged in this section. The framework of impartiality for the Ceann Comhairle that is provided for in the Constitution and the legislation for the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission is not enhanced or expanded to provide for the provisions set out in this section.

The Minister of State, Deputy Parlon, who is piloting this legislation, must elaborate on the advice he has been given. While the advice of the Attorney General may have been given to the Minister for Finance, the Minister of State must also have received it. If not, it leaves me feeling uncertain that he has not elaborated on why the Taoiseach of the day is the chosen instrument to effect the dismissals provided for in the Bill.

See this speech in context