Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I should say that it is a good try. Most bodies would like that but the idea is somewhat problematic in view of what I stated regarding the Constitution earlier. In our system, money may only be voted for a public body on foot of a request from the Government. Within that constitutional imperative, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform’s consent is required for any allocation of public funds and a Minister – which in the case of IHREC is the Minister for Justice and Equality – must take political responsibility for that allocation and be answerable to this House. No State body, no matter how important its work, can be given a guarantee of receiving all the funding it regards as sufficient. This could vary from time to time.

The current language of the Bill is stronger than one would often find in similar language in legislation. There is reference to "reasonably sufficient", although it is not what the Deputy desires, but that is not found in the legislation relating to any comparable State agency. This recognises the work of the commission as resources can be an issue. This text is a recognition that this commission is in a special position and we have gone as far as is constitutionally permissible to protect funding, which is effectively what the amendment is trying to do. We have gone as far as we can to put in a wording that is quite robust compared to what would normally be in legislation. If a future Government should decide to impose disproportionate cuts on our human rights and equality bodies, that is an issue for political resolution in this House and elsewhere, but it cannot be solved in advance by this amendment or any other form of words that one might wish to put in legislation. We need to ensure the best cross-party support for these issues, and I acknowledge the cross-party support that we have seen with the development of the new commission. I will oppose the amendment on that basis.

See this speech in context