Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No.8:

In page 4, to delete lines 31 to 35 and substitute the following:“(5) (a) Subject to the approval of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission and to such exceptions, restrictions and conditions as may be provided for by regulations, secretarial facilities may be provided to a qualifying party for the purposes of facilitating the parliamentary activities of its elected members.

(b) Subject to the approval of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission and to such exceptions, restrictions and conditions as may be provided for by regulations, the secretarial facilities provided under paragraph (a) may also be proportionately distributed to include the provision of such services to a formally recognised group of the Oireachtas.”.

The Technical Group is recognised under Standing Orders. There must be a minimum of seven Members and a majority of those must not be aligned to a political party. There can only be one technical group and as a consequence, there can only be one majority and that pretty much determines that. According to the way it is interpreted, a Deputy is or is not a member of a group the day he or she is elected, so it is a fixed number at that point.

The Houses of the Oireachtas Commission runs the House and has a budget to do that. The expectation is that when there is a group of that size, there is some guaranteed mechanism of co-ordination. The Technical Group currently employs two people essentially, one of whom is on a job-share basis. We are told that it is an administrative convenience to provide names to the Ceann Comhairle but it would be difficult to foresee how it would be done without that and for the House to function, especially to know where the likes of Ministers are likely to be at any given time. Essentially this is something that makes for smooth running. With 15 or 16 Members in our group, it is not a simple task like it is for parties, which have spokespersons and so on. Considerable co-ordination is required.

Whatever about the internal co-ordination of the group itself, how we interact with the House is important. There is a lot of communication with the Government and Opposition Whips. There can be late changes which we can make and the House can then run smoothly. We liaise with the Questions Office and we are now required to provide lists and things like that, so more is required of us now than there was at the beginning. We have to liaise with the Bills Office and make sure things are on the Order Paper, and liaise with the Journals Office. If we are putting through Private Members' Business on a Wednesday - we have one in every three - it will not be accepted from an individual Deputy as it must come through the Whips' office. The House demands this of us, so there is a recognition of a need for it, but there is no direct provision and the legislation has a gap.

We help to facilitate business continuity planning in case of emergencies. We have to provide a telephone number of a person who can be contacted by day and night. We provide our co-ordinator, who is employed by us separately to being employed by the Houses of the Oireachtas. We manage facilities when the photocopier breaks down. There is not just one Deputy involved and there has to be co-ordination, even for things like letting the engineer gain access.

We are located in Agriculture House and aspects such as car parking, people getting locked in, the provision of badges and so on are all examples of the practical issues that help to make this House function. Essentially it would not be expected that a political party would have to do this without that resource, but our group has been expected to do it without a direct provision of a resource. That is the argument we have been making over the last two years.

I know the Minister is not going to accept this amendment because we have spoken about it. It is very disappointing because this is the big opportunity that we see to insert this in the legislation as a matter of entitlement, where there is a group that is recognised under Standing Orders. Some will argue that we should have full parity with the parties but I am not arguing that. I am arguing that there should be a provision that is sufficient to allow the functioning of the group. I wish to acknowledge that the Minister sent me a letter about what the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission can do. It appears that we could make an argument that we could get a secretarial assistant attached to me because I have been nominated as the Whip. That is not something that is a guaranteed for a group that is a recognised group. That is the key issue here. The Minister has also told me that the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission can revise its regulations but representatives of the Commission have told me that the impediment for them in dealing with us is that it is not provided for in law, and that the only groups provided for in law are political parties.

I believe we have made a valid case. We are here because we put ourselves as Independents or people from small parties. The electorate decided to elect a large number of us. Independents have been in this House since the State was founded. I acknowledge that this is an unusual situation in that there is such a large group of us but it is not the first time there has been a large group. The last time I was a Member, there was a Technical Group, and there was also a Technical Group in the last Dáil following a by-election. It is recognising the reality and giving a guarantee that there is a minimum that will be provided with regard to the functioning of the House. It is not about deciding on policy because we do not do that and we clearly cannot do so because we are a very disparate group. It is not about those functions; it is merely about making this House function in a way that works for all of us. It works for Ministers, who have one telephone number they can call and we can make sure that our group is briefed or whatever. It works for all of us, but it has to be provided for. There is a difficulty with the way that it is suggested, although I acknowledge that it would probably be the fist step in terms of progressing the issue. However, it is inadequate for the reasons I have outlined.

See this speech in context