Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

-----and attacking members of the Judiciary. It is unhelpful and also unfair because this issue has not been caused in any way by judges. They are in a most difficult position, but it is one that was thrust upon them by the Government. The Minister of State and his colleagues must deal with this situation. I find it extraordinary that the Government has done very little to redress the imbalance. The preservation of judges' independence is essential and I hope that is a given from all sides of the House. A direct consequence of that independence is the matter of public respect and esteem, which must not be damaged or diluted in any way. We are running the risk of bringing judges into disrepute because of something for which they are not responsible. Article 35.5 of the Constitution is quite clear in stating: "The remuneration of a judge shall not be reduced during his continuance in office". That is the wording of our Constitution, Bunreacht na hÉireann. It is not sufficient to say, however, that just because of that constitutional impediment we should leave matters as they are, because there is a question of fairness and justice here.

It is unfair that there should be what, in effect, is a most generous exemption for certain public officials, namely judges. It is simply unfair and I do not believe that any argument the Minister of State puts forward can include an element of unfairness. This is especially so when there is a well-founded perception, or rather a fact, that judges are well paid - perhaps rightly so, given the nature of their work and the need to preserve and underwrite their independent position. Having said that, I think judges should play their part in what is a financial crisis brought about by the Minister and his policies. Why was this problem not foreseen earlier, however? Why was it not dealt with in a better way than by allowing a situation to develop where we have a weekly media circus in the form of a league table of how many District, Circuit, High or Supreme Court judges have, or have not, made a voluntary contribution? That is no way to allow the situation to develop because, ultimately, it brings the law into disrepute. If public respect and esteem for the Judiciary is damaged, it will undermine the whole basis of the administration of justice in this country. It will be damaged by having such a weekly league table. It is akin to TDs' expenses whereby journalists jockey for position in dressing up a story to make the news. It is fundamentally unfair and wrong. As well as bringing this House into disrepute, it will also affect the position of judges on the Bench as people who independently preside over the justice system.

The Minister has placed judges in a very difficult position and it is not sufficient for him to quote some legal advice as the reason behind this generous exemption. I put it to the Minister to find a solution. I believe the basis of such a solution is in the amendments. If the matter is to be dealt with comprehensively, then Deputy Shatter's amendment must be followed. There are and will be opportunities to deal with the situation early next year. It is unfair and unsustainable, however, to say that a group of people who are generously paid by public funds through the Exchequer should, in effect, have an exemption. Many of them may not wish to have such an exemption, yet they have been placed in a difficult position because of the Government.

See this speech in context