Dáil debates

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

An Bille um an Naoú Leasú is Fiche ar an mBunreacht (Tuarastal Breithiúna), 2011 — An Dara Céim / Twenty-Ninth Amendment of the Constitution (Judges' Remuneration) Bill 2011 — Second Stage

 

7:00 pm

Photo of Dara MurphyDara Murphy (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. As I drove up to Dublin this morning, I listened to the concerns expressed on the radio that the legislation was being rushed. However, one of the finest compliments that can be paid to the Minister, Deputy Shatter, is to note the urgency with which he has approached his responsibilities thus far. Even though we are only six months into this Dáil, we are already contemplating two Bills which will allow referendums to take place on 26 October. Judging from the earlier comments by Deputies O'Brien and Calleary, I expected their respective parties would offer their full support for this Bill but subsequent Fianna Fáil speakers lead me to doubt they can agree on whether they consider the referendum to be worthwhile or if they believe Fine Gael is posturing on it. They cannot have it both ways.

Anybody who canvassed the people during the last general election campaign would concur that they want us to address the issue of the pay of judges and senior public servants. I agree, however, that we have been well-served by our Judiciary. Rather than focus on the small percentage of judges who did not volunteer reductions, we should acknowledge that some 90% of them did so. The referendum respects the spirit of a judgment in the Supreme Court several years ago regarding discrimination against the Judiciary on tax matters. As long as individual judges are not singled out in any way, it is fair for a Government to include them with the rest of the public service when deciding on pensions and payments.

The amounts involved are not insignificant. Deputy Dooley asked about the figure of €5.5 million, which I understand does not include voluntary savings but the Minister may clarify the matter in his concluding statement.

Today being international democracy day, it is appropriate to respond to the suggestion that the referendum, if passed, would undermine the separation of powers in this State. I would argue the contrary because we are putting the decision before the people. It is the ultimate demonstration of the separation of power and of the process of democracy that it is the people who will vote to make the decision on this matter, according to which the Government and the Dáil will subsequently legislate on their behalf.

In an environment where we all share a responsibility, in so far as possible, to reduce costs to the public purse, there is undoubtedly a significant cost involved in holding presidential and other elections and referenda. As such, it makes economic and practical sense that, where appropriate, we put several issues to the electorate at once. People give of their valuable time to vote and there is a cost to the Exchequer in setting up elections. It makes sense that several proposals be dealt with together where it is possible and appropriate to do so. Members opposite have pointed out that the programme for Government commits us to bringing forward referenda on issues other than those which will be put before the people next month. I am satisfied, from where I am standing within the parliamentary party, that, unlike under the previous Government, we will see these issues, including the question of children's rights, being put before the people by way of referendum. I look forward to that. I call on everybody to support this important referendum when it comes before them.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.