Dáil debates

Wednesday, 20 April 2011

Nurses and Midwives Bill 2010: Report Stage

 

10:30 am

Photo of Caoimhghín Ó CaoláinCaoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

It is a case of Lord make a saint of me, but just not yet. What policy decision must the Government take to afford a committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas a scrutiny and vetting role in respect of the appointment of a State board? Why would we not agree to do that? I was willing to believe the Minister had not tabled the amendment because it was an oversight and that the Minister of State would accept the amendment, given that it represents the position our respective parties argued consistently in the period prior to and since the election. The Government will carry out these reforms, but just not yet. This is incredible. All we are asking is for a joint committee of the Houses to have a role in approving the makeup of boards. This is a reasonable position and one to which the Government parties allegedly hold.

On two levels, the Oireachtas committee on health is outside the loop because the Bill is going to provide that "the Minister shall appoint". The committee is being rendered redundant. Where reform of matters relating to State boards is concerned, the Government has missed a golden and important opportunity to walk the walk. It is talking the talk, but there is no delivery. This was a minor test and I do not accept that it can be kicked to touch.

While I welcome the Minister of State's participation, the Minister, Deputy Reilly, who was the lead Opposition voice on health for a considerable period, would have been blistering of the absence of the then Minister for Health and Children, Mary Harney, if she had not attended to handle particular legislation. This is the first Bill under his area of responsibility to be laid before the Thirty-first Dáil. Why in heaven's name is he not present as the Minister for Health and Children to deal with Report Stage of this important Nurses and Midwives Bill? He has a long record of criticism of the former Minister for her absences and lack of interest on so many occasions, but he is not demonstrating a good start in terms of this critical legislation by not being present in the first instance and by failing to reflect an important amendment that he should have adopted or, at the very least, on which he should have advised the Minister of State to indicate acceptance.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.