Kevin Humphreys (Dublin South East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

In recent weeks we have had a lot of debate about reform and a certain amount of criticism regarding how long that takes. However, this Bill is a key commitment from the programme for Government and one we are delivering on. I commend the Minister, Deputy Howlin, who has been leading on this Bill, and his officials for the work they have done to bring the Bill to the House. I believe the Bill will increase transparency and accountability in regard to how the State does its business and reverse the damage done by Fianna Fáil and the PDs in 2003 to what was ground-breaking legislation which had been brought through by Eithne Fitzgerald.

The process of bringing through a suite of legislative reform will make the Government and the State much more open to scrutiny, which I welcome. We have to look at what is coming down the line, for example, the legislation on whistleblower protection, the inquiries Bill, the extension to the powers of the Ombudsman and legislation on a planning regulator. All of these are very necessary reforms and I look forward to them being implemented. I believe they will go a long way towards preventing the mistakes of the past being repeated. One of the most important things this Government can do is to put in place a body of legislation that will prevent any future Government - God forbid that Fianna Fáil would come back to power again - running this country into the ground.

Having been involved in this Bill at many stages, I have to say that reform is slow, is not glamorous and gets very little coverage in the media. However, the reform measures are exactly what we need. When this Bill is passed, it will apply to bodies funded by the State, unless there are specific reasons such as State security or commercial sensitivity. I welcome in particular the extension of freedom of information to aspects of the Garda Síochána and to the Central Bank and the NTMA. I ask that, at the next stage, we reconsider the position of the Central Bank and the NTMA to see whether we could go further. I agree with Deputy Catherine Murphy, who pointed out earlier that we might need to take this a little further.

The introduction of this Bill comes within a broader context of Dáil reform. In fact, it is one of several key reforms we have had since the election. There has, unfortunately, been a certain amount of belittling of the improvements made to how we do our work in this House, particularly in regard to the Friday sittings. The reality, however, is that those sittings allow backbenchers to bring their own legislative proposals to the House, some of which have been very interesting. Indeed, several of the Bills introduced by colleagues touched on the freedom of information issue, and the debate thereon helped to shape the development of the proposals we are discussing today.

The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform was responsible for the pre-legislative scrutiny of the heads of the Bill. I very much welcome this new aspect of the legislative process, the usefulness of which was also clear in the case of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill and the Climate Change Bill. In each of these cases, the heads of the Bill were published in sufficient time to allow a comprehensive debate at the committee. Unfortunately, however, this and other changes to the process of our parliamentary work have been widely ignored, notwithstanding the heavy focus on the debate surrounding the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill. In the case of the Bill before us today, the pre-legislative scrutiny stage afforded the finance committee an opportunity to hear the views of experts from home and abroad, journalists and representatives of communities affected by the proposals. It was an excellent template of how things should be done and very useful in terms of allowing us to outline to the Minister what needed to be covered in the legislation.

A concern I have in regard to the Bill relates to the application of its provisions to the semi-state sector. We had extensive discussions on this issue at the finance committee, and there was broad agreement that the freedom of information provisions should apply where a monopoly exists. The last thing any of us wants is for semi-state companies to be hindered in their commercial operations. We all accept the rationale for ensuring that commercially sensitive information remains beyond the remit of the legislation. However, where semi-state companies have a monopoly, it is vital that they be open to scrutiny. I urge the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, to raise this issue with the Minister, Deputy Brendan Howlin, as I intend to do myself. Irish Water and the gas network will function as monopolies, as does EirGrid. Where there is a monopoly, it is important that the companies in question are held to account. In the absence of market competition, we must ensure taxpayers get the full benefit of their investment. The ability to submit freedom of information inquiries would be helpful in that regard, as will the forthcoming regulation of lobbying Bill. I understand a certain amount of lobbying went on to ensure the State monopolies were excluded from the freedom of information provisions. That Bill will be very helpful because it is an area in which accountability and transparency are badly needed.

There are several agencies which, because they are North-South bodies, must, I understand, be excluded from the provisions of the Bill before us today. However, oversight of these bodies is important. We should examine whether safefood, Tourism Ireland and Waterways Ireland, for example, might be brought within the scope of the legislation. My experience of dealing with Waterways Ireland on several occasions is that it is extremely difficult to extract information from it. Including it and other bodies with a North-South remit in the freedom of information regime would be useful for citizens, Members of this House and journalists.

Overall, this is an excellent Bill, although there is a need for some amendment. I hope the Minister will take those changes on board on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context