Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, to delete lines 27 to 30.

The purpose of this amendment is to remove the gag which prevents the director general from commenting on Government policy. Directors general of State bodies are often a font of wisdom in regard to issues and developments within their remit. The Government's position is that a situation must not be permitted where such persons may, in an official capacity, make a statement or express a view which places them on a collision course with Government policy. While I accept this argument to some degree, I understand the problem has never arisen and is not likely to occur in the future.

A director general appearing before a committee, where he or she considers that an issue requires to be addressed, should be allowed to explore that issue in response to queries raised by members. Members of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment have a good record of being sharp and incisive in seeking information. Sometimes one can almost see a witness recoil at the realisation that he or she may well have to address a particular issue. I accept that there cannot be open season and that Government policy cannot be emasculated on the hoof by somebody with a contrary view. However, there is scope for some leeway in this regard. At yesterday's meeting of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, we managed to get a good understanding of how the employment subsidy scheme is working and why the Government may well have to change tack in that regard. Deputies Varadkar, Morgan and I asked various questions and I was very impressed with the responses from the departmental officials. No secrets were given away but they were forthright in their attitude and, without deviating from Government policy, acknowledged that there is a problem. Moreover, they told us in as nice a way as possible that we politicians should get down into the ring and sort the issue out. That is fair enough, the boomerang may come full circle and the buck can stop at either end.

I accept that we cannot allow Government policy to be thrown out as that would make the place ungovernable and effectively invite anarchy. However, if a director general of a State body is of the view that a particular policy or scheme is not achieving the objective for which it was established and implemented, members of the relevant Oireachtas committee should be in a position to ascertain that view without the official in question being unduly constrained by the requirement not to deviate from the strict Government policy of the day. No Government is so sensitive that it would be damaged by the honest views of such persons. It is possible to allow a loosening of the tonsils of officials without allowing them carte blanche to denounce Government policy.

See this speech in context