James Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 19:

In page 11, to delete lines 22 to 40 and substitute the following:"(4) Where the Director General is absent the functions of the Director General referred to in subsection (1) may be performed by such appointed director as may be designated by the Director General from time to time, with the consent of the Minister, and where no such designation has been made, and the Director General is unable by reason of his or her ill health to make such a designation, by the Minister.

(5) If the office of Director General is vacant, the functions of the Director General referred to in subsection (1) may be performed by such appointed director as may be designated by the Minister for the purposes of this subsection.

(6) For the purposes of subsections (4) and (5), where in this Act or in any other enactment functions are assigned to the Director General or provision is made in this Act or in such enactment as to the manner in which a function so assigned is to be performed by the Director General any such reference to the Director General shall be construed as including a reference to the appointed director designated by the Director General or the Minister under subsection (4) or, as the case may be, the Minister under subsection (5) for so long as that appointed director stands so designated and entitled to perform the functions of the Director General.

(7) Where the Director General resumes duty the person designated under subsection (4) shall cease to perform the functions of the Director General.".

As outlined on Committee Stage, the Bill currently provides that in the extended absence of the director general, or if the office of director general is vacant, the functions of that office may be performed for a period not exceeding six months by an appointed director - that is, a member of the directorate designated by the Minister. There is currently no provision in the Bill to deal with short absences of the director general. I introduced a Committee Stage amendment to deal with that. The other change I proposed in committee was to allow the director general rather than the Minister to designate the appointed director to cover absences. This seems to me the most efficient operational arrangement. The designation would, however, require the consent of the Minister. The situation is different if the office of director general is vacant. In those circumstances, the Minister can designate and appoint a director to fill the gap pending the recruitment of a new director general.

The amendment I introduced also removed the maximum period during which cover could be provided on a temporary basis during an extended absence or when the office was vacant. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin voiced concerns that removing this time limit could lead to unsatisfactory circumstances in which an acting situation was allowed to continue indefinitely.

Moving this time limit could lead to unsatisfactory circumstances where an acting situation was allowed to continue indefinitely. I therefore withdrew the amendment and undertook to give it further consideration. Deputies will see that amendment No. 19 addresses absences of any duration and provides for the director general to designate and appoint a director to stand in for him or her during any absence. Some role is, however, retained for the Minister to take account of unforeseen circumstances where the director general is absent but had not made such a designation and is unable to do so due to ill-health as when taken suddenly ill or perhaps involved in an accident. With an organisation of national importance such as the HSE it is, I think we would all agree, essential that there is always someone with clear authority to perform the functions of the director general.

The reference to a maximum of a six month duration for cover is not included. I appreciate the point Deputy Ó Caoláin made on this matter on Committee Stage and have given it some thought. The difficulty is that we have to try to anticipate various scenarios. It is possible, for instance, that the officeholder could be seriously ill but expected to be fit enough to return to work after treatment and recuperation and indeed could be well on the way to recuperation and suddenly suffer a relapse. With a serious illness this could take longer than six months and to deal with such circumstances we should not specify a maximum period for which someone can stand in.

Turning to circumstances where a designation by a Minister is to fill the gap when the post is vacant I should clarify that this would always be a temporary arrangement. The Bill makes it clear that the Minister must take steps to fill the vacancy as soon as may be. This is covered in section 16L. I hope, therefore, that the Deputies accept the rationale behind amendment No. 19 and support it. The Bill currently provides in section 16K(5)(b), as a result of an amendment tabled at the Select Sub-Committee on Health and Children that the appointed director designated by the director general for the purposes of his or her absence or, in the case of a vacancy, the appointed director designated by the Minister if any has to be so designated, will, if present, chair meetings of the directorate.

Amendment No. 20 maintains the situation and is consequential on amendment No. 19. The Bill already provides that the appointed director designated to stand in for the director general should chair meetings of the directorate when the director general is absent or the office is vacant. Amendment No. 20 is a technical amendment to cover the situation in which the director general is absent, and he or she has made no standing in designation and is incapable of doing so by reason of illness.

See this speech in context